from H. J. le Riche, late Assistant Inspector of Sheep.

from A. Aadnesen, praying for lease of land near Port St. John for whaling station.

from J. J. Blatherwick, widow of Thomas Blatherwick, late lock-up keeper at St. Helena Bay, Malmesbury.

from Agnes L. Johnston, teacher.

from Clara Weiss, late of Education Department.

from inhabitants of Tulbagh, praying that further Asiatic immigration be stopped.

as chairman, brought up the fourth report of the Select Committee on Public Account. The Committee, having considered the subject matter of the Loans Consolidation Bill, recommended certain amendments.

That the Bill be read a second time on Wednesday.

seconded.

Agreed to.

said that, in reply to a question which had been asked, he might state that the Estimates of Capital Expenditure in connection with the railways would be laid on the table in the course of the afternoon. Another question had been addressed to him as to when the report of the General Manager of Railways would be laid on the table. He was sorry to say it could not be just yet. He had seen the General Manager, and the latter had informed him that it was impossible—that the returns and statistics for the calendar year covered by the report were not sufficiently advanced to enable him to complete his report. He might mention that in the Cape it had not been the practice to issue the report until nearly the middle of the year. In 1906, it was not ready until the 25th of May; in 1907, it was only available on the 19th of June, and in 1908 it was not ready until the 6th of June. He found that the last report that was published was not issued until July. He was surprised, in view of this, that there had been a demand that the report should be laid on the table. It would take some time still before it would be available. A question had also been asked with regard to a report by the Railway Board. Well, he might say the late Board had never presented a report to Parliament, and he did not know that it was ever contemplated that the present Board should do so. So far as he knew, for the present session at least, it was not intended to lay a report by the Railway Board on the table.

said: Mr. Speaker, may I be allowed, with the indulgence of the House, to address you on a matter of a personal explanation? I was misled by a slight inaccuracy which appears on page 881 of the Votes and Proceedings to make an imputation against the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, whom I suspected of having had an alteration inserted in the amendment he moved on the ground that it was a merely formal or verbal alteration. On your ruling, I unreservedly withdrew the remarks in which I had asked for an explanation, and I must frankly confess that the explanation I afterwards received is in accordance with your suggested explanation, and your ruling that the clause as finally put and adopted is, without doubt, as it appears in the Bill; and in the form suggested to the Chairman at the table and the Minister, by the hon. member for Fordsburg, while the clause was under debate. But from notices in the press, I am pained to find that my remarks were construed as imputing malafides to the officials of this House, which I never for a moment entertained or intended, as they are strict to a degree in the zealous performance of their work under exceptional pressure of business. That pressure alone I thought might be accountable at that hour of the night for a slightlaxity in accepting what might be represented as a verbal alteration, but even that I am quite satisfied they never allow. My apologies are due to you for not having in the first instance gone to you to ask for an explanation of the inaccuracy appearing in the Votes and Proceedings, that you might have cleared the whole matter up. I regret that course did not then occur to me.

said that, since the remarks he had made, he was given to understand that the Minister would move an addition to the Bill in regard to the Government being responsible for any thefts committed on the part of Government servants; and that this would meet the exigencies of the case.

dealing with the new clause moved by Sir Henry Juta on a previous occasion, said that the principle of the clause was a universal one, and as far as he could ascertain, there was no postal or telegraphic department in the world where responsibility like that in the clause moved by the hon. member was accepted. The Post Office could not be held liable for errors caused by climatic or magnetic disturbances. Mr. Merriman, when he had said that by the Rome Convention it was forbidden that gold or precious stones should be conveyed by post, had committed a slight error, because clause 16 of the Convention was very clear on that point; and stated that gold and precious stones could be conveyed unless forbidden by the country concerned. It was not forbidden, therefore it was allowed. Private cable companies were also protected from responsibility, and rightly so. The work of the telegraphic department could not be carried on if the Government were to assume liability for every error that was committed. The Hon. Minister went on to give instances of how the Government might be defrauded, and said that the Government could not accept responsibility for these matters. If the clause were agreed to that Government would be the only one which would accept such responsibility, while Governments of all parts of the world would not. If the clause passed they would have a whole army of swindlers in the country making claims on the Government. As to what had been said about the Railway Department accepting liability, the difference was that the Railway Department was run at a profit, and the Post Office Department was not; and everything that was sent to the railway was accompanied by a waybill, and a receipt was taken for it. The present Bill assumed a great deal more liability on the part of the Government than had ever been assumed before. The Government declared itself responsible for fraud on the part of public servants, and m another place he intended to move in that the Government would take responsibility for theft on the part of Government servants.

said that if the proposed clause were agreed to it would not be the case that the department would be liable for loss caused by climatic conditions. As to the statement of the Minister about receipts given by the Railway Department—on that analogy the Post Office ought also to be responsible for all registered packets, for which receipts were given. Yet he did not accept responsibility.

put the question that clause 119 proposed to be omitted stand part of the Bill, and declared that the “Ayes” had it.

The new clause moved by Sir H. H. Juta accordingly dropped.

asked whether the Bill would not be in conflict with the British Merchant Shipping Act, and whether it should not be reserved for Royal sanction?

said that he had been asked to bring the fact before the House that certain communications had taken place between the Minister and the representative of the Union Castle Co. The communication was by telephone. The Castle Co.’s representative pointed out that the rate of 14s. for mealies included transshipping at Southampton for other ports, which cost 7s. 6d. to 9s., leaving only 5s. to 6s. 6d. to the Mail Co., out of which stevedoring charges had also to be paid, and that the mealies also measured 60 cubic feet instead of the usual 40 feet, so that the Mail Co. only received 3s. 4d. per ton of 40 cubic feet measurement. The Minister also stated that the rate for Skins was 70s. per ton, whereas the charge was 21s. 9d. per ton of 40 cubic feet, so that the figure as given to the House was misleading, inasmuch as the hides took up so much room in the steamer. The representative intended to deal with other figures quoted by the Minister, but was rung off.

replying to Major Silburn, said that so far as the Merchant Shipping Act was concerned, this Bill was not in conflict. In regard to the question as to whether the Imperial Government had the power to reserve this Bill, if the hon. member read the Act of Union he would be able to see for himself the position in that regard. In regard to the figures quoted by the hon. member for Durban, Berea, he (Sir David Graaff) asked the representative of the principal member of the shipping combine in this country to criticise his figures or tell him where he had misquoted him. As to the question of 70s. or 21s. 9d. per ton for skins, the charge of 70s. was by weight, and 21s. 9d. by measurement at 40 cubic feet per ton. From the Argentine wool and skins were carried at 22s. 6d, by weight, and not by measurement. Therefore they must compare 22s. 6d. with 70s. charged by the combine. He had been careful to verify his figures before he brought them before the House. In justice to the Conference Lines, when he quoted 14s. he did not say that 14s. would include a number of outside ports. That figure of 14s., he understood, would include outside ports, and he compared it with the rates from the Argentine. 8s. to 9s., which also included outside ports. He was informed that the rate on mealies from here to the United Kingdom in mail steamers was 15s., and not 11s. 6d. In so far as his statements and figures were concerned, he had nothing to correct and nothing to withdraw.

rising to a point of order, said that he had not received an answer to his second question.

That is not a point of order.

said that he had looked into the matter, and his view was that the Bill was not in conflict with the Merchant Shipping Act. In regard to the other question, he did not think that the Bill could be reserved.

The motion for the third reading was then agreed to, whereupon

The Bill was read a third time.

said he wished to move an amendment to the effect that owners of small adjoining farms should be entitled to erect a joint dipping rank.

said that the amendment in question was out of place. The matter should be dealt with when the Dipping Tanks Loan Bill was introduced.

moved to delete section 32.

I am afraid it is too late now, because certain amendments have been adopted in that section.

That the following be a new subsection (f) to follow sub-section (e), viz.: “(f) to order or cause any sheep or goats within such areas as may be defined by notice in the ‘Gazette’ to be dipped in manner prescribed by regulation”; and on page 10, line 24, after “structures,” to insert “or appliances.”

seconded.

Agreed to.

Some other additional amendments having been agreed to,

moved: That the Bill be now read a third time.

objected, whereupon

The third reading was set down for Wednesday.

moved that order No. 3 (Railway Budget Debate) be discharged, his reason being that it was almost impossible to discuss the railway policy of the Government until they had the constructive policy before them.

thought the motion somewhat unreasonable. The proper time to discuss the expenditure which the hon. member referred to would be when the Loan Bill was before the House. He was willing, however, to meet the hon. member, and would move that order No. 3 be discharged, and set down for Wednesday.

seconded.

The motion was agreed, to.

moved that orders 4 up to, and including, No. 10, be discharged for the purpose of taking No. 11 (Habitual Criminals Bill).

said he did not actually want to object to this specially, but he must point out the gravity of such procedure, which had unfortunately grown to be a practice. It was clearly evident to hon. members that there was little chance of their reading the Habitual Criminals Bill that day, and yet they were asked to suspend half a dozen orders and take this Bill. This was a most inconvenient procedure, and they would have to adopt some rule to prevent this sort of thing.

I quite appreciate the remarks of the right hon. gentleman, and will withdraw my motion.

said this was a very important matter, and he would like to know whether it should not be withdrawn, and set down for some other day.

I cannot agree to the suggestion.

said they had a report from the Select Committee on this Bill, which contained very valuable matter, and ought to be discussed in the House, because they would not be able to discuss it in committee.

If my right hon. friend means that he wishes a day for the discussion of the report, I am quite prepared to agree to that.

moved in line 16, after “labourers,” to insert “not being one of such native labourers ”; in line 40, to omit “or to act as a messenger in connection with the recruiting of labour.” He pointed out that many small recruiters despatched then natives without a conductor. One of the natives had a note stating that he was the conductor, but that was not a bona fide way of carrying out the law.

said he could not understand the amendment. The definition of “conductor” included anyone appointed as such by the recruiter, black or white.

said the Bill was so full of pitfalls that a native labour agent would be a lucky man if he did not get into gaol over it. (Laughter.)

did not think the amendment of Mr. Mentz would carry out the object of the mover.

The amendment in line 16 was negatived.

moved: In line 19, to omit all the words after “runners” to “supply” in line 2C. and to substitute “recruits”.

Agreed to.

stated that at a later stage he would move an amendment as to the definition of “employer.” This matter was a delicate one.

objected to the definition of “director,” in order to call attention to the enormous powers to he enjoyed by that gentleman. He could grant, renew, or refuse a licence, and he could order an inquiry to be held in the case of any labour agent, and if thought desirable, could cancel the licence. The official’s powers would not be confined to recruiting for the mines, but for other kinds of work, such as brick or road making. If a person appealed against any of the director’s orders, one had to deposit £50, and if any part of his decision were upheld, the appellant would have to pay all costs. The director had more powers than the Supreme Court.

The definition was agreed to.

suggested that the Bill should be allowed to stand over until the Minister was prepared to define exactly who and what an employer was.

said the Bill had been on the paper for a very long time. It was a Bill to improve a very serious state of affairs, and with the vast amount of work on the paper, there was a serious risk that if this were put off, the Bill would not be passed, and they would lose an opportunity of regulating this whole business, which, he could assure hon. members, was one that cried aloud for regulation. He hoped in the interests of humanity and good government, the Bill would not be postponed.

moved in the definition of runner the word “native” be omitted, and “person” substituted. He said he could not see why white men should be prohibited from engaging in this occupation, though he agreed it was not a desirable form of work for white men. Still, when they found the policy of the Government to be such as limited the employment of white men, it was not right that they should shut the door to white men in regard to this occupation.

said the hon. member seemed to wish to bring white people down to the low grade of runners. Why they did not wish to have white men as runners was because white men of that class too often went to native kraals, supplied the natives with bad liquor, told them a pack of lies, and engaged them in a, sort of way which made one blush. The sooner that sort of thing was stamped out, the better.

said that so long as the Government were intent on helping to supply natives to do all the bone and muscle work which white men could do, and so refused the white man an opportunity of earning a livelihood, so long would the Labour party object to the white man being prevented, even in his extremity, from earning, in such a way as this, undesirable though it was, at least enough to keep him alive.

said the object of the Select Committee was to make white men take out labour agents’ licences. The business of a runner was not one in which they would like to see a white man engaged.

said that Mr. Creswell had often protested, in tones of thunder, against native labour being employed; yet now he wished to make the white man an instrument to procure additional coloured labour.

The amendment of the Select Committee to omit “person” and to insert “native” was agreed to.

moved: In line 38, to insert a new definition as follows:; “‘ recruiting ’ shall mean the procuring, engaging, or supplying, or the undertaking or attempting to procure, engage, or supply natives for the purposes of employment in work of any kind within or outside the Union.”

This amendment, and the amendment proposed by the Select Committee were agreed to.

moved as an amendment in line 40, after “behalf,” to omit all the words to the end of the sentence.

said that he could not agree with the hon. member that the Bill as it stood might lead to difficulties. A recruit might employ any native on errands.

supported the amendment.

supported the previous speaker. The definition as printed compelled practically every employer to pay a white man for recruiting natives, which was going too far.

asked whether natives or coloured people could act as labour agents?

said that no coloured people acted as recruiters.

The amendment was negatived.

asked whether a clause of the Bill had not somehow been dropped out, because the interpretation clause referred to mines and works, and no reference would be found to mines and works, excepting in new clause 24 or old clause 22?

said that he did not quite follow the hon. member. He did not quite see where the difficulty came in.

thought that something was necessary, and must be added, because it seemed that a man needed a licence if he wished to get 20 men to put up a grand stand, for example.

advised the hon. member to wait until they came to clause 5, where the definition came in, and where works were defined; and the same meaning was given to works as in the Mines Bill.

said that he understood that perfectly. The interpretation clause gave certain works certain meanings, because such words were used in subsequent portions of a Bill; but that was not the case in the present Bill, except in the one clause.

said that the intention of the Minister was perfectly clear—he wanted to make it as wide as possible.

said that, before the clause was put, he would like to ask the Minister whether he was going to provide for a white person who might engage in the work of a runner?

said that what they proposed was that a European should not be licensed for this work at all. The definition referred to a runner who was a native.

put it whether the effect would not be that a European who engaged in this class of work would be free from all restrictions set out in the Bill, unless there was some positive enactment in the Bill prohibiting a European from carrying out these functions. The definition of “runner” did not? touch him, nor did any of the restrictions applicable to a runner.

asked the hon. member to read the penalty clause.

said that, in view of the questions which had been raised, it seemed to him that the Minister would be well advised if he allowed the clause to stand over.

I don’t know whether the hon. member desires this Bill to become law; but if he does he is taking a course which will frustrate it.

said that they would like it made dear what was meant by some of these definitions—for instance, the portion dealing with advances. Much as they loathed the labour native policy which the Government had adopted, they did not want to see a great deal of the trade of Johannesburg ruined by the introduction of the truck system. Did these advances mean cash or goods and cattle?

said that the definition meant what it said. There might be advances in cash or any sort of substitute, or anything of value.

said that what they had in their minds was, that employers might compel natives to buy at their own store, instead of in the open market.

said that, on the second reading debate, he understood the Minister to say that the Government were going to do away with advances by way of cattle. Now, he had told them that they were going to keep that system. “Advances,” as defined under this clause, would include cattle advances.

said it was not intended that that system should continue, but they must not forget that there were a number of contracts which, may have been made on the basis of that form of advance. The object of the Government was to discountenance the system.

was proceeding to address the committee further when

ruled him out of order on the ground that he could not discuss details on this clause.

rejoined that his only course, then, would be to divide the House on the clause.

again returned to the question of a European who might engage in the work of a runner, and said he could find nothing in the Bill to prevent a European from acting as a runner or penalising him.

said that if a European engaged in work of that nature, he became a runner, and if he did that work without a licence he be came liable under the Bill.

put the question that the clause as amended stand part of the Bill, and declared that the “Ayes” had it.

called for a division, which was taken with the following result:

moved: In line 48, to omit “proper officer,” and to substitute “director.”

Agreed to.

On clause 4, labour agents, compound managers, and conductors to be licensed,

moved an amendment, which would necessitate runners being licensed or obtaining permits.

The amendment was adopted.

moved to add at the end of the clause, “and no person shall recruit or aid in recruiting natives on ground leased by him, or in respect of which he collects rents from natives.” The object of the amendment was to prevent undue advantage being taken of the natives. At present it often happened that natives who were in arrear with their rent were practically pressed into the service of the mines by the person entitled to collect the rent, which was unfair.

accepted the amendment, which was agreed to

On clause 5, recruiting of native labourers to be under authority of licence,

moved: In line 10, after “engages” to insert “or recruits.”

Agreed to.

moved: To add at the end of sub-section (a) “ordinary industrial operations or,” the object being to render it unnecessary for persons recruiting natives for industrial purposes to take out a licence.

moved an amendment: In line 10, to omit all the words from “bona fide” to the end of paragraph (a) and to substitute “farming operations, domestic service, trade business, or handicraft, provided the number of natives in his employ do not at any time exceed fifty.” He pointed out that as he read the clause, it meant that everybody who engaged natives outside of farming must have a licence.

said he did not quite catch the definition of the word “recruiting,” as it was not on the paper. There were about 1,500 men working on the alluvial diggings; some of these men employed one or two, or perhaps 20 boys, and as be interpreted the clause, they would be compelled to take out a licence. He thought this clause should be recast, so as not to compel these men to take out a licence. He moved to add the following amendment: “No person shall recruit natives for employment except for his own behalf.”

hoped the Minister would allow the clause to stand down, because it wanted recasting. According to the construction of this clause it was quite possible to recruit natives for farming or any sort of employment outside the Union. He thought it would be best to delete the words “within or outside the Union,” and insert the words “on any mine or works within or for any purpose whatsoever outside the Union.”

thought the clause as it stood was much better than with the amendment of the hon. member (Mr. Watt). There seemed to be some confusion between the word “recruiting” and “employment.”

Could we have a definition of “recruiting”?

The only accepted definition is where a man went away from his base to recruit labour.

said that boys were employed for other purposes than those of the mines. What he wanted to know was if a man engaged a number of boys for work in a store or other work, would be have to take out a licence?

said it would be extremely difficult to define certain employment. If hon. members would give the Administration credit for a bit of common-sense, he would tell his hon. friend (Mr. Jagger) he could engage his natives provided he did not set up a system of touting.

said they had no objection to trusting the Administration, but they did not know what the Administration was. The Minister had just stated that the member for Cape Town could engage as many natives as he wanted provided these men came to him and offered themselves for employment. He (Mr. Runciman) might want 100 men, and would have to send to Cape Town for them. Therefore he came under the operation of this Act. He thought they ought to have the objections stated in this clause. A ship might come in requiring a couple of hundred men; was a stevedore going to take out a licence to supply these?

said it seemed to him that this Native Labour Bill was simply for the benefit of the mines. The hon. member for Cape Town (Mr. Jagger) and other hon. members were outside its scope altogether. If they were agreed on this point, what could be the objection to the amendment of the hon. member for Zoutpansberg (Mr. Mentz)?

said he quite agreed that those people who did not regularly recruit native labourers and did not tout for them should not be included, but he failed to see why farmers or anybody else who recruited labourers for large irrigation works should be excluded. Surely these people should be made to take out licences in the same way as persons engaged in mining and other works. He thought a great deal was to be said in favour of the amendment.

said that the difficulty arose through the omission to describe the nature of the operations or employment in which natives were to be engaged. If the labour was for mines and works, why not say so in the clause? He hoped the Minister would allow the clause to stand down, in order to admit of its being redrafted. At present, it seemed to favour those engaged in farming operations, and so on.

was understood to say that the regulations were to apply to organised recruiting, and he thought it would be better so far as the farming community were concerned, to leave the clause as it was.

said that the Bill as it stood would prevent even Divisional Councils from engaging gangs of natives to work on roads. He supported the hon. member for Zoutpansberg.

said the Bill would be applied to the large industrial areas where they had gold and coal mines. If the amendment of the hon. member for Zoutpansberg were carried, the exemption in favour of agriculture would disappear, and the sole test would be: how many natives does a man employ?

asked the Minister to give him an assurance that the men working on the River Diggings would not be affected. He pointed out that, as the Bill stood, a farmer might go to a kraal and get natives to dig for him, without taking out a licence; but, if he left his farm and went to dig on the River, unless natives came to him and offered their services, he could not engage them without first taking out a licence.

said that it was not intended to apply the regulations to a case such as had been quoted.

said that, as the clause read now, every employer of native labourers, excepting a farmer, would be required to get a recruiter’s licence. The Minister had said that that was not the intention. He thought, the Minister should redraft the clause, so as to make it dear that it only applied to mines and works. He moved that the clause stand over so that the Minister might redraft it.

trusted the Minister would accept the motion because the clause was very important. Agriculture was protected, but other industries should likewise receive assistance.

The motion was agreed to.

On clause 7, discretion as to issue, etc., of all licences,

said he would like to know on what ground it was proposed to leave it to the will of the Director to say who might or who might not be a labour agent; He maintained that there should be some right to a man to follow the occupation if he thought himself fitted for it. They should not leave it to an official to determine a man’s qualification, so long as He bore a good character.

The clause was agreed to.

On clause 8,

moved: In line 30, after “licence” to insert “applicable to any one district.”

Agreed to.

On clause 9,

moved: In line 61 after “licence” to insert “Provided that the runner may exercise his calling in any additional district if (authorised there to as prescribed.”

Agreed to.

On clause 11, circumstances under which licences may be suspended or cancelled,

moved an amendment to the effect that Magistrates, after hearing cases in connection with contravention of the regulations, should submit all papers to the Director, the latter to have power to order the licence to be cancelled or suspended. The hon. member said that it would be difficult to do the work contemplated under the Bill without contravening the regulations in some way or other. It was too severe a punishment for a man to lose his licence irrevocably. It was because the clause went too far that he had moved the amendment.

thought that the hon. member had gone too far, and it did not necessarily follow that a man would lose his licence because he had been found guilty of a contravention of the Act. The power was left in the hands of the Minister.

thought it was rather stiff that ta labour agent should have his licence suspended merely for getting into the hands of the police for a minor offence. Of course, what was intended was to put the power in the hands of the Minister. He, later, moved an amendment, in line 20, after the word “offence,” to insert the following words, “while exercising his calling as labour agent, conductor, or runner (as the case may be).”

said that the Minister was, after all, the person responsible to Parliament.

thought that Mr. Burton had not understood the effect of the amendment.

Mr. Mentz’s amendment was agreed to.

Mr. Creswell’s amendment was negatived.

moved as an amendment, to omit the words, “may suspend the licence and,” in line 37, and to insert “or suspension thereof for such period,” and to omit “or its restoration.” The hon. member thought they were put ting too extensive powers in the hands of the Magistrate.

said he hoped the hon. member would not press the amendment.

supported’ the amendment.

put the question that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause, and declared that the “Ayes” had it.

called for a division, which was taken with the following result:

moved: In line 39, to omit all the words from “who engages” down to “licence” in line 41, and to substitute “or holder of an employer’s licence who recruits natives,” and to insert the following new sub-section after line 58, viz. “(2) Every native labourer shall be registered to the person on whose behalf he is employed or recruited.”

In line 46, after “concerned; and,” to insert “that all recruited native labourers whose contracts are submitted for attestation have been medically examined, and are not suffering from any contagious disease, and any contract or contracts entered into with native labourers afflicted with any such disease shall be considered null and void and ”. The mover said his object was to prevent natives suffering from syphilis going to the mines.

said he entirely concurred in the scope of the amendment, but it did not go far (enough, because other diseases—such as tuberculosis, phthisis, and heart disease— should be included. All natives should be medically examined before their contracts were completed. He suggested the follow in amendment: “In respect of the contract with any native, proof shall be given to the satisfaction of the attesting officer that the native attested is in sound physical health.”

moved as an amendment that no native under the age of 18 years he attested. His object, he said, was to prevent the depletion of the native labour supply for farms owing to Kafirs of tender age being sent to the mines.

hoped Mr. Wessels (would not insist on the amendment.

notified that as it was now five minutes to six he would, in compliance with the sessional order, have to report progress.

Progress was reported, and leave obtained to sit again on Wednesday.

Railways and Harbours Capital and Betterment Works in progress and proposed, 31st May, 1910, to 31st March, 1912.

The committee will resume at eight.

Business was suspended at 6 p.m.

asked whether the Minister intended to have a separate department for animal and human diseases, and whether he intended to have a department to deal with bacteriology generally?

said the present department was under Dr. Theiler, and was for animal diseases.

asked what the latest information was as to horse-sickness?

said that previous reports from Graham’s Town stated that a cure which applied to one part of South Africa would not apply to another.

said he was glad the question had been raised, and he was able to tell the committee that Dr. Theiler hoped to be able very shortly to bring his experiments regarding horse-sickness to a successful issue. Wherever possible immunisation would be attempted, but it was only to be expected that experiments would take some time.

asked for information with regard to a certain form of lamb gall-sickness in Bechuanaland?

said that this matter was engaging Dr. Theiler’s most earnest attention. He had carte blanche to work wherever he liked.

said there were farmers who were prepared to place their farms for carrying out examination work.

In reply to Mir. G. J. W. DU TOIT (Middelburg).

said that no remedy had yet been discovered for East Coast fever, although there were hopes of success. Dr. Theiler had propagated the disease experimentally, without the carrying tiok,

pointed out that as far as Dr. Theiler’s report went, there was nothing discovered that would cure East Coast fever or immunise animals against it. The tick was the carrier, not only of East Coast fever, but of almost every other disease complained of in connection with stock-breeding. He thought that was admitted, and now they had got the chance to exterminate the tick. Bacteriology was very much in the interests of the country, but it would not provide the cure for all the diseases. Something else must be done, and he left it to the Minister of Agriculture to guess what that “something” was. (Laughter.)

asked what the Government intended doing in order to fight paralysis among cattle at Barkly East?

said he had no information, but would see what could be done.

The sub-vote was agreed to.

On sub-vote (d), wool industry, £4,937,

asked what the nature was of, the duties of the officer described; as “flockmaster”?

replied that the Transvaal flockmaster was the general wool expert. His duties were at present confined to the Transvaal, but it was hoped that very shortly they would be extended to the Union.

said young farmers should receive systematic instruction in the grading of wool, etc., from the experts. At present the latter were acting too much in a, peripatetic fashion.

supported the previous speaker.

replied that the wool expert could not stay in one place, but had to go round, lest the country should not derive the full benefit of his advice. He visited the experimental farm on shearing days, and on those occasions he imparted instruction to students.

The sub-vote was agreed to.

On sub-vote (e, dairying industry, £9,010.

asked whether the office of superintendent of dairying had been filled yet?

replied in the negative.

asked whether the Government intended to do anything to protect the cheese industry? Be pointed out that whereas butter was protected to the extent of 3d. per lb., there was absolutely no protection for cheese.

thought that the Government should do something in the direction of popularising Colonial cheese on the railways. He had asked for a little cream cheese for two years, and only once had been able to get it on the dining cars. Every time he travelled he made a point of asking for it, and he thought other hon. members ought to do likewise. (Hear, hear.)

said he wanted some information with reference to the increase in the number of dairy inspectors, and the decrease in the number of dairy instructors. He wanted to know what the duties were of the Superintendent of Dairying and the inspectors. He thought that the instructors had been very useful indeed, and he could not understand why their number had been reduced. He admitted it was quite impossible to build up a big dairy industry Until they had better railway communication.

said he would like to draw attention to the amounts provided for the equipment of dairies at Standerton and Middelburg (Transvaal), which appeared to him to be altogether too big an outlay. They would never get the interest on the money. Besides, it did not seem to him to be right that the Government should compete with private enterprise in this way.

said that the question of duty was being dealt with by the Industries Commission. The present Dairy Superintendent was a Cape official who exercised general control. The reduction on Instructors, referred to by the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet, was more apparent than real, because one of them had been appointed inspector. Many changes had been postponed pending reorganisation of the department. If it had not been for East Coast fever, there would have been a notable improvement in dairying and he was sanguine with regard to the future. The amounts mentioned by the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, were but revotes, the money having appeared on the Transvaal Estimates. He explained the agreement arrived at between the Government and the co-operative dairies. Government would build the factories, which would be run by societies.

asked why the Transvaal expert had been dismissed? He should have stayed on for another couple of years, because the institutions that owed their origin to him would suffer, and if his successor were a less able man, farmers would have occasion to regret the change.

said he would like to endorse what had been said as to the development in the dairy industry last year. Rut he would say there was a greater development—much greater—in prospect, but they would have to rely upon private enterprise. This Government work at Standerton and Middelburg was started to stimulate enterprise and to give an example, but he thought it must end here. They could not emphasise too much that they would have to depend upon private activity for the development of the industry. He might say that at Harrismith they had two creameries, and the smaller of them—a little co-operative dairy—was producing from 50,000 to 60,000 lb. of butter a month. He did not know why co-operative creameries had not been a success in the Cape Colony, but he was perfectly sure they could be made successful. At Harrismith the cream was carried by ox-wagon from farm to farm. The farmers co-operated, and there was no difficulty about delivering the cream or about, the farmer getting his cheque at the end of the month. Co-operation had made a tremendous revolution through the whole district. And they were going further there; they were putting down exotic grasses which would maintain ten times the amount of stock that the ordinary grasses would support.

asked what the possibilities were of these dairies at Middelburg and Standerton eventually becoming paying propositions? They had cooperative dairies in Natal, which were run at a profit.

said the Transvaal expert considered that each factory should be supported by 1,500 cows. In the districts mentioned, however, there were more than that number, and there was every prospect of success.

said that with regard to what had been said regarding the future of dairying, he would like hon. members to remember what had been accomplished in a few years in Australia. Fifteen years ago Australia was importing butter; today the country was exporting butter to the extent of four millions a year. That was accomplished to a great extent by Government work—by Government giving a hand at the start. They did not have what was done by one Government undone by the succeeding Government. They persisted in their policy, notwithstanding lots of failures and discouragements. Only when they pursued a persistent policy in this matter, as Australia had done, would they be able to rival the position of that country.

said that, while Government could help, they would need to go to work in a more economical fashino than they had done in the past. He would like to ask what was being done in regard to recovering the outstanding advances and overdue interest from the Cape co-operative dairies?

said that the creamery at Darling was doing good work, and so were two others. The one at Klipheuvel had never been in working order; it was closed up, and the machinery was looked after by the Railway Department. He would not like the creameries, which were built on private land, to be liquidated. Somebody would make something. (Laughter.) If they could save these undertakings and save Government money the better it would be. On the other hand, to throw good money after bad without any advantage to the country or the creameries would be a mistake.

hoped the Minister would press the Select Committee to go into the Cape Province. Continuing, he said that land was purchased in Australia for dairying purposes at £5 an acre.

Who do?

The dairying people. And their market is six thousand miles nearer to us than it is to them. Why can’t we do what they do? Of course we can!

said he hoped that when the Standerton and Middelburg dairies were taken over the Minister would see that there was no unfair competition.

said that in a young country like theirs they must not be too critical about small matters. It was inevitable that there must be losses here and there, and unless the Government was prepared to assist, one could not make anything of South Africa. He did not advocate wasting money, but experiments must be earned out, and unless they did so they would do nothing in South Africa. (Cheers.) There was the ostrich farming industry and wine farming, which had had their ups and downs; and must they abandon them just because they had their periods of depression? There was talk of a large population in South Africa, and if they adopted scientific methods, as had been adopted in regard to the ostrich industry, there was certainly room for a large European population. They should not rage against expenditure at Standerton, which was intended to educate people.

said that the failure of the Wellington creamery was not due to over-capitalisation, as Mr. Maasdorp had! said, but owing to other reasons, and the cows and the grass were not at fault at all.

said that these Government experiments were all very well, but they discouraged people, and set back an industry for years. He was afraid this would have the same effect as had been the case in the Cape Colony. Their failure in the Cape Colony had been due to lack of investigation and over-capitalisation. They were killed by Government money.

said that with regard to the Wellington business, he hoped the Minister would give the committee the assurance that the liquidator would not proceed to extreme lengths before the committee he mentioned had reported on the matter.

hoped that they would not be discouraged by what had happened in the Cape, because in the Orange Free State their experience had been all the other way about; and the first creamery they had was so successful that several other successful creameries had been started. The Bloemfontein creamery would pay a good dividend, although they had some difficulties at the outset. The Orange Free State creameries were a decided success. (Cheers.)

said that he did not think there was any need for State assistance in the case of men who could afford to pay £9 per acre, and wait for three years before they got a return. There were, however, a tremendous number of young people who might be helped when going into the industry.

said that the Minister of Agriculture surely did not expect him to be satisfied with the reply that he had given. State-fed dairies should not be allowed in the Transvaal to compete with dairies that had been started and carried on by private enterprise. He moved that the Standerton revote be reduced by £500.

replying to Mr. MEYLER, said that the Government had intended to conduct the creamery alluded to by the hon. member, but it would be taken over by a co-operative society, so that it did not involve the Government in any additional expense. Rent would be paid.

said he hoped that, in the interests of Colonial industries, the reduction would not be carried.

complained that certain portions of the country had not received that attention by the experts as other parts had received, and he specially alluded to the north-western part of the Orange Free State, which was a good cattle country.

asked upon what terms the advances had been made to the creameries.

said that the creameries were built from money voted by the Transvaal Parliament. This was now a revote. They were built as Government undertakings from Transvaal money. The Government did not propose to run them now as Government creameries, but to hand over the buildings and machinery.

At a fair rent?

acquiesced.

withdrew his amendment.

The sub-vote was agreed to.

moved that the vote be deleted, as he thought it would be of no use to them. Ostrich farming in the Transvaal would never pay.

hoped that the hon. member would not press his motion, as there were many of them in the Transvaal who were not so experienced in these matters as their Oudtshoorn friends, who seemed to be jealous. (Laughter.)

also hoped that the hon. member would withdraw, as he said that the expert had been of much use in advising farmers, especially in regard to what kind of ostriches should be purchased. The Transvaal had done a good deal prior to Union, but it had bought inferior birds. The industry would prosper, however, provided technical advice could be obtained. Part of the vote was for the Cape Province.

said he thought this was a pure waste of money. The Cape ostrich-farmers had developed the industry entirely by their own efforts, and they were now being called upon to contribute towards the cost of development of trade competition in other parts of South Arica.

said they would begin to wonder whether they lived under a Union Government or not. (Ministerial cheers.) If they were going to set up protection in one Province against the others they might as well have not had Union at all. (Ministerial cheers.) The same argument applied to ostrich feathers as to creameries. Why should there not be a little reciprocity in the matter?

said the ostrich industry was in an entirely different position from the dairy industry, which had an unlimited market. But that was not the case with ostrich feathers. We were on the margin of over-production of feathers, and if fashion changed there would be over-production.

said that if they followed Mr. Jagger’s amendment they would, if they were logical, abolish the School of Mines. It was a pity that Mr. Jagger, being a Cape member, should object to the proposal. Evidently the Americans did not anticipate a cessation of the demand for ostrich feathers.

did not think that some hon. members were fair over that vote, which was introduced into the Transvaal prior to Union. (Hear, bear.) The Vote included £240 expenses in connection with the investigation of the causes of bars in ostrich feathers. That would be for the benefit of Cape ostrich-farmers. (Hear, Pear.) He would like to see that portion of the vote slightly increased, as the inquiry could not properly be carried out for £240. Sir Thomas then asked if the Prime Minister would make a definite statement as to what his policy was with regard to the Ostrich and Angora Goat Export Bill.

asked whether it was the case that the ostrich expert would resign on June 30, as had been hinted at by Sir Thomas Smartt. The expert had, he said, been of great use in advising them where to plant lucerne, and what were the best ostriches to farm with. In the Northern Transvaal, East Coast fever had almost put an end to cattle-farming, but the country was an excellent one for ostriches. The birds were even found there in the wild state.

asked the Minister of Education if he could give them some information as to the secret intimation he conveyed to certain ostrich-farmers at Middelburg the other day.

spoke of the poverty existing in the Rustenburg, Zoutpansberg, Pretoria, and Waterberg districts for the past 10 or 12 years, owing to rinderpest, losses due to the war, East Coast fever, and the like. Something had to be done for them, and these districts were well adapted for ostrich-farming, so that he hoped that the vote would be agreed to.

said that in Oudtshoorn they had built up that big industry without experts. They were their own experts; and if the Government wanted to make the ostrich feather industry in the North a success, they must not have an expert advising farmers at every turn. The people must depend on their own efforts.

said he was surprised at Mr. Jagger’s speech. If it had come from one of the men directly interested in the ostrich industry, one could, to a certain extent, understand it, but he really thought Mr. Jagger had a broader view of South Africa. (Ministerial cheers.) The expenditure was undertaken before Union. What would Mr. Jagger say to the people in the North having to contribute to co-operative wineries or creameries? It was a mistake that the hon. member should take this narrow view of the industries of the Union, and he (the Minister of Education) did not think it was the right spirit at all.

Not the Convention spirit.

There would have been disunion if we had gone on in that spirit. Proceeding, the Minister of Education said he could not see how there could be any danger in overproduction when a pound of ostrich feathers fetched £87. People in London had taken the opportunity of making ostrich feathers a feature of the Coronation. In fact, there was at present a boom in ostrich feathers. Then his hon. friend spoke about the low class feathers, but there was a distinct demand for these, and if South Africa was to be at the top of the tree, then they would have to supply the whole market. Now, with regard to Middelburg. There he received a deputation from the Ostrich (Farmers’ Association, and one of the things that they urged upon him was to establish an ostrich feather bureau—a bureau of information, where information from all parts would be received, and advice would be given. The bureau would also serve the purpose of an investigating medium in the matter of disease and improvement of stock. He said that the (Government would take the matter into consideration. Again, with regard to the mystery. He arrived in Middelburg on the Tuesday, and found that there was a Congress of this Ostrich Farmers’ Association. Mr. Thornton, the principal of the Agricultural College there, who had recently been to Europe and America, that night, in a speech, seemed to have created a scare among the ostrich farmers. The chairman of the association asked him (the Minister of Education) whether he was willing that Mr. Thornton should give them some information that was in his possession. Realising that there was some misunderstanding in the matter, and that if he withheld his consent it would only increase the scare, and make the mare’s nest still bigger, he consented, and said he had no objection to this information being communicated to a certain person. This information was not something that was likely to injure the industry, but to benefit it, so he thought it would be best to keep it quiet. He could only say that this feeling of uncertainty and scare was not doing the industry any good. (Hear, hear.) As regarded the Bill upon the paper, the hon. member for Fort Beaufort had asked a question. This Bill was simply to consolidate the various Acts in the country. The non-passing of the law would not alter the existing laws one jot. It was the intention of the Government to go a little further than what was contained in this Bill, but before they could do that they must consult their neighbours, because there was an honourable engagement with them and it would be a mistake to break it. The Government at present were negotiating with these parties, and after that they would put the Bill through.

did not agree with his hon. friend that there was no danger of over-production. Ostrich feathers were a luxury and a fashion, and he (Sir Thomas Smartt) believed there was a very grave danger of overproduction. Would the House be surprised to hear that during the last 30 years the production had increased 740 per cent.? In the last 20 years it had increased 245 per cent., and during the Last 10 years, from 1899 to 1,909, it had increased 1,112 per cent.

So has the consumption.

My hon. friend says so has the consumption, but does my hon. friend think that the consumption will always keep up with the supply? Exactly as they had to regulate the diamond industry, so it was necessary to regulate the ostrich-feather industry. In 1879 £96,000, of ostrich feathers were produced, in 1889 £229,000, in 1899 £373,000, and in 1909 £792,000. Everyone who had taken a deep interest in the industry believed it was necessary that the House should express an opinion whether they would allow the expert of ostriches or not. It was because they had practically got a monopoly of this industry that they desired to prevent the very best birds in this country being exported, and so give other countries the advantage of 30 or 40 years’ experience the ostrich farmers had had in this country, especially in the Cape Province, to build up; the, industry. He thought it would be only fair if the House were given an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon the subject. The, Minister of Education had, said that, whether the Bill was passed or not, the position would, remain the same. Well, if that were so, why was the Bill introduced?

It is a consolidating measure.

said that they did not want consolidation if they were not going to make any alteration in, the consolidation. If they were going to remain in exactly the same position as they were at the present time, there was no necessity to introduce the Bill. But when the Bill was introduced, surely it was only fair to give the House and those who represented the ostrich industry an opportunity of expressing their opinion. He said most unhesitatingly that if they were to poll the ostrich farmers of this country concerned, the vast majority would be in favour of confining the industry within the Union. He thought it was most unfair of the Government not to give the House an opportunity of expressing its opinion upon this most important question. The Government knew that according to the rules of the House, having placed a measure before the House, it was impossible for any member to introduce a measure of a similar character, and consequently by putting the measure at the end of the orders the Government gave no opportunity to the House to express an opinion upon the subject.

said that he could not follow the hon. member.

If you were an ostrich farmer you would.

said that he had sat a good many years in Parliament, and it was the first time to-night that he had ever heard that the progress of an industry was a matter for regret. The hon. member said he looked upon it as a most regrettable state of things that the ostrich industry had improved itself by 700 per cent. (Laughter.) Well, that was the most extraordinary or Hibernian, argument he had ever heard. (More Laughter.) Fancy, they were to regard it as a matter for regret that the ostrich industry had improved by 700 per cent. Proceeding, he said that if they were going on in this mad fashion without reference to the feedings and interests of their neighbours, who already had ostriches, and who could easily acquire mere—they had only to put a farmer on the border with a good supply of money, and in the night ostriches would stray across the border into German territory—it was impossible to prevent the export of birds from this country. The German Government, whether they called it autocratic or bureaucratic, was a respectable Government, and had never allowed the export of a, single ostrich. That he knew to be a fact, and if they quarrelled with their neighbours they, were going to land this country and ostrich-farmers into a serious crisis indeed. The only way to prevent the export of ostriches was by co-operation with those who had it in their power to export them against their wishes. He hoped that they would be able to proceed with legislation during the present session. He would like to see legislation by which they would substitute for a mere verbal agreement a treaty or agreement with their neighbours, undertaking not to export ostriches from their territories. That was the legislation he should like to see passed. If they did not pass such legislation, and legislated regardless of the feelings and wishes of their neighbours, they would do the ostrich-farmers of the Union serious injury. He hoped that when his hon. friend (the ’Minister of Agriculture) proceeded with his Bill they would legislate upon lines which would bring together all the interests in South Africa, whose interest was against the export of ostriches from the whole of the country.

said he thought that Sir Thomas Smart had sounded a right note of warning. He would remind the House that 25 years ago, when ostriches were generally at a higher price than they were to-day, they over-produced feathers, and flooded the market. There was the same danger to-day, and the consequences would be more disastrous than they were 25 years ago. He did not think the Government appreciated the feeling of disquiet which had been caused in the Eastern Province by that “secret” — the Middelburg incident.

said he could assure the hon. member that he was not aware of any secret. The position was that the Government had in view something by which they thought they might benefit the ostrich-farmers, but it was necessary to be quiet. That was the whole “secret.” It was a sort of Masonic secret. The Government hoped by doing a certain thing to benefit the industry, but by divulging what it was they feared they would not be able to do that service to the industry. He thought it would have been better if they had not talked about it at all.

said the fact was that the Government had published a half-hatched scheme. The whole of the ostrich farmers throughout the country were agitated by the half declarations, and did not know whether they were of a serious character or not. It would have been better if the Government had remained quiet until their schemes were ripe. He supposed he might take it, from what the Minister had said, that the House would be given an opportunity of discussing the Bill. If that were so, he was perfectly willing to drop this discussion.

said that he did not want to stop discussion on that matter; but be merely wished to point out that there had been a full discussion on the second reading of the Bill, when Sir Thomas Smartt had every opportunity of speaking. As to what had been said just now, he would reply that it was impossible for the Government to say to its exports: you must say this or that. As to what Mr. Vintcent and Mr. Becker had said about “the secret,” be hoped that they would take the Government’s word for it that there was no truth in the newspaper reports in question, as he had already said on a previous occasion. There was no new development to threaten the prosperity of the industry.

said he was not going to talk about the “secret ”; he thought it was another edition of the Wynberg “spook.” (Laughter.) He wished just to refer to the possibility of annoying the German Government and getting reprisals from them. He deprecated any trading on that. The Germans were extraordinarily practical people; they were not going to do anything because they were annoyed. They were going to fill up German South-west Africa with our best ostriches, if they possibly could, and then snap their fingers at us. To trade on the idea that the German Government or the German people were going to do something because they were annoyed was to ignore their history and their character. That they were going to annoy the Germans would not move the Germans in the least; they were going to act with a single-minded regard to their own interests.

The vote was agreed to.

spoke of the increase of burrweed, and desired some information from the Minister as to what was being done. One inspector, he thought, was entirely insufficient to keep down the weed.

replied that the vote was not a new one. They had had such an official in the Transvaal who went about from district to district, and saw to it that the farmers extirpated burrweed as far as their farms were concerned; and the Government and municipalities were responsible for the extirpation of the weed on their property. The work was an important one, especially in connection with the wool export. He moved: On page 34, under G5, to insert the following new item, viz., “Purchase of material for destruction of jointed cactus, £5,000.”

in asking whether powers for the destruction of noxious weeds would be delegated to the Provincial Council, drew attention to the thistles that are spreading through the Harrismith district and other parts of the Free State.

said that while travelling in the Transvaal he had seen that there was a great increase of a certain weed which he was told was called “khaki-bossie,” and should be eradicated

said that what was usually called “khaki-bossie” was easily eradicated, and it was not necessary to introduce legislation dealing with the matter: one had simply to out the seed-bearing parts off. There was another weed called “khaki-bossie,” however, which was much more difficult to extripate, because it grew again from the root.

asked if the £5,000 for the destruction of jointed cactus would be spent on Government or on private land?

answered that the Government intended purchasing poison with the money; and this poison would be furnished to farmers who wished to extirpate the weed. Private people were powerless against this particularly noxious plant, which was fast ruining fine stretches of veld.

referred he the salary (£150) paid to the economic plant investigator, pointing to the highly scientific and very valuable work that was being done by this official. He thought the Minister might consider the question of his remuneration.

pointed out that grants had been made to certain Municipalities in the Transvaal for the destruction of noxious weeds, and asked whether the money was recovered from the Municipality.

said that a reduction of the vote was provided for in the Estimates, the reason being that the Government intended to discontinue these grants in the future.

The new item was agreed to

asked for information in regard to the item of £500, purchase of machinery and expenses, Central Tobacco Factory.

said he noticed that four tobacco instructors were provided for in the vote. Those industries, he believed, were Confined to the Transvaal. He would like to know whether more assistance in the shape of instruction was to be given in the Western Province. In regard to cotton growing he saw that a good deal of attention had been given to cotton growing in the Zoutpansberg, so far with fair success, but the thought there was a splendid opening in the Eastern Province, especially about East London, in fact, all the way from Port Elizabeth up to the Umzimkulu border. He asked if the Government intended to give any attention to that part of the country.

said that he represented a constituency in which there was a very considerable coastal area, and in that part of the country there had been an increasing interest in the growing of cotton. There was some prospect of a very large amount of capital being attracted from oversea in furtherance of this. He did not know, of course, that the Government could render any assistance to the people who were interested in the large scheme, but what he was interested in at the present time was the efforts of the smaller men. The industry would be quite a new one, and if the Government would only go into this question properly, and make investigations, they might be able to save the smaller man from encountering a good number of discouragements. As far as he could judge, the word “cotton” need not have been inserted in the vote, because it seemed that the whole vote was going to be devoted to tobacco He would like to know what the Government intended to do with regard to developing the cotton area in the Eastern Province.

spoke in favour of more assistance being given to tobacco growing and the erection of a tobacco factory in his district.

said that a very good class of tobacco was grown in his constituency. An excellent dip could be manufactured from it. He thought it would be better for them to go in for locally manufactured dips than the imported kind. At present they had no market for the local product.

said that, as to the tobacco expert, he came out, together with a number of others, from America, and was under a two years’ contract. He was engaged in connection with the Central Tobacco Warehouse. The £500 was not for working expenses, but was a sum which the Government had to spend on necessary machinery. As to the Central Tobacco Warehouse, the Government of the Transvaal had placed a sum of money on the Estimates for the erection of that warehouse: and it had been erected, and was let to the Co-operative Society at Rustenburg. As to the tobacco expert, it was the Government’s intention, under the scheme of reorganisation of the Agricultural Department, to make the Transvaal expert the expert for the whole of the Union. Regarding cotton-growing, it was not the intention to have experimental stations all over the country, but their experts would make investigations, and where they thought there was a suitable district for the growing of cotton, they would advise the people concerned as to the best seed to use for cotton-growing and the like. One of these instructors was at present in the Transkei. As to the erection of a factory for the manufacture of tobacco dip, he recognised that tobacco dip was by far the safest and best to use—(hear, hear)—but the necessary machinery would be so expensive that it would not pay to erect it. The South African tobacco stalks contained rather too little nicotine for the manufacture of dip.

thought if the Rustenburg farmers had the store for nothing, that was sufficient without Government paying for labour, forage, animals, implements, etc.

desired information upon this item.

in reply, said this item was put on the Estimates for the purpose of sending a man, in connection with the two industries—the currant and fig industries—to Asia Minor for the purpose of studying the processes of drying currants and figs. They could have sent an officer of the department, but it was felt that he would still be an officer of the department, and he would not be able to go about and explain the processes to the farmers. They had in Mr. Cillie a man who had done more for the dried fruit industry than any other living man, and who had been employed by the Union to go about the Western Province, and notice the various methods of drying currants and figs. It was decided to ask Mr. Cillie to undertake the journey. Mr. Cillie had written to the Agricultural Department to say that he did not want to go, and if the House desired that the Government should not undertake this work, then the whole thing would drop. He thought, however, that it would be a bad day for the industries if the House so decided.

said that he did not think anybody could accuse him of being apposed to the development of industries in this country. In this case, however, he contended that if they were going to spend a considerable sum of money they should send one of the experts of the department. He was not opposed to the vote. But he was opposed to a farmer being sent. It would be far better to send one of their scientific officers.

hoped the vote would not be taken off. The Government had induced farmers in the Western Province to go in for growing figs. In some years the crops were a success; in other years they were a failure, and it was absolutely necessary there should be some investigation. He thought that if proper information were obtained, they could do a considerable export trade in figs. As to whether the person sent was a farmer or another individual, he thought that was a matter of detail. It ought not to interfere with their sending a man; they could be sure that the Government would send a suitable man.

supported Sir Thos, Smartt’s views.

said that if they knew the farming community, they would realise it was necessary, if they were to do any good at all, to send a man whom the people trusted, a man who had a stake in this country, a man who was coming back to live among the people here. As to the gentleman they proposed to send, he would point out that Mr. Cillie had studied the dried-fruit industry in California, and as a result he and the Rhodes Fruit Farms had done more for fruit in the Western Province than any other single individual had ever done. If Mr. Cillie were willing to go, he thought that he should be sent.

said that there had been complaints about the experimental station in the Ermelo district selling fruit in the open market. This had been stopped; but now people were prevented from purchasing fruit at that station, which was not right either. During the present year, fruit had again been marketed.

said that he must take strong exception to what the Minister had said about the experts. If the farmers of the Cape Colony were going to take up that attitude there was no wonder that they were behindhand in the race. He would invite the Minister to go to the Transvaal, and study what took place there. Exactly the same thing was said in the beginning; there was a tremendous prejudice against the experts. What happened? Experts from other countries were brought, and the farmers to-day appreciated them. (Hear, hear.) After a little time they did not care what language the expert spoke as long as he could teach them their business. He would tell the Minister that a far better thing than giving way to prejudice of that kind was to tell them that they wanted something to improve their position, and it did not matter from whom they learnt it.

said that, in regard to the question of the currant and raisin industry, there was no need to send to Greece or Smyrna, because for years they had carried on the industry in South Australia with a great amount of success.

hoped it was not the Minister of Education’s intention to sneer at experts. These gentlemen had done good work in Natal.

explained that it was not his intention to sneer at experts. In fact, while he was Cape Secretary for Agriculture; he employed more experts than any of his predecessors,

asked what hold the Government would have over a private farmer to ensure that the country would profit by the experience he had gained?

replied that once before Mr. Cillie had been sent to California, and ever since he came back he had been teaching farmers in the Western Province. (Hear, (hear.) Mr. Cillie was prepared to enter into a similar contract now.

said that Mr. Cillie was the lest expert they could send. He was a man they could trust, and personally he had received excellent advice from him.

Would this gentleman be a whole-time officer?

During the fruit season.

Would he be able to give his whole time to the service of the farmers?

said that such a man was not an all-time officer, and did not receive a salary. He only got his expenses refunded. A scientific man could not be sent at present, because their scientific experts were needed here in regard to reorganisation of the department land the like. An expert might be got from Smyrna, but then the language difficulty would come in. He thought it would be best if the matter were left for him to deal with.

Will my right hon. friend say that he will consult the Horticultural Board before making the appointment?

Certainly.

drew attention to the expenses in connection with brandy taken over from the Agricultural Distillers’ Association, under Act 23 of 1909 (Cape). He thought they ought to get a resolution of the House upon this matter. At the present moment the brandy was still in the store, and they were getting no further forward. The House should agree to the sale of brandy to the best advantage.

said that there was a recommendation on the matter from the Public Accounts Committee, and he thought it would be better to let it stand over.

said he hoped the Right Hon. the Minister of Agriculture Would dissuade the Government Viticulturist from writing letters to the public press. He did not know what was the nature of the quarrel between him and a certain Civil Commissioner; but it was not to the advantage of the Service for one official to abuse another in the public press.

said that he had seen the letter referred to in the newspapers, and he was investigating the matter.

said that there was an item of £365 for a locust officer, and he desired to know what kind of work he did.

said that this was a Transvaal officer, who was responsible for giving directions for combating the locusts, and organising the whole work, which has been attended with the greatest success.

inquired about the “Agricultural Journal,” which, he trusted, would be sent free to farmers, as before, instead of their having to pay 2s. a year subscription.

suggested that the hon. member should become a member of the Western Province Agricultural Society. If he did so, he would be supplied with a copy. (Laughter.)

said that it was not a question of making money, but a question of administration and business. If the “Journal” were sent free, to whom must they or must they not send them? It would not pay to send the “Journal” gratis, because whole parcels full had been returned. Whoever refused to pay 2s. a year could not expect to get anything from the Government.

suggested the Government should copy the New Zealand and Australian plan of publishing little booklets.

said that the department were doing exactly what the hon. member suggested.

referred to the report of the Auditor-General in connection with the Central Co-operative Society in Johannesburg. He pointed out that a loss had been incurred to the amount of £503 11s., and be wanted to know if the Government were going to bear the loss? If so, out of what account was it being paid?

said that the arrangement had been made that the Government was to pay the salaries few a certain period, but the society had to pay back by instalments the amount advanced. Everything had now been refunded, and the Government had nothing more to do with the society.

spoke of the good work done by the branding officers in the Transvaal, and the good system in vogue there, under Mr. Pienaar. He hoped that that system would be applied to the whole of the Union.

said that branding was not compulsory in the Transvaal, except where East Coast fever had broken out. For the rest, it was a voluntary system, and that, he thought, should be done in the whole of South Africa.

emphasised the usefulness of branding, and spoke of the reduction of the salary of scab inspectors, who had to visit unhealthy districts.

said that there had been no reduction of salary, but a grant which had been given previously had now been withdrawn, because scab and brands were now being inspected separately once more.

asked for some particulars about the voluntary branding system.

said that the intention was to have no two brands which were the same

The sub-vote was agreed to.

in reply to Mr. C. T. M. WTLCOCKS (Fauresmith), said that it was better, in regard to dry farming, to send experts round each farm, showing the best way of going to work. Erecting stations all over the country would be a very expensive business. In the Transvaal, the experimental stations existed prior to Union. Another one had been started at Tweespruit. The system had worked well. It depended on deep ploughing, and it increased the value of the land.

asked whether the dry land experimental stations at Bloemhof had been started in the right place?

said that dry farming had been attended with a great measure of success, and grain had been grown where it had never been grown before.

The sub-vote was agreed to

considered that Government made an excessive profit on the sale of guano, at the farmer’s expense. They could, sell it at a greatly reduced price, and yet made a handsome profit. Grain-farmers would greatly benefit if that were done, because their position was a much, more difficult one than that of stock-farmers.

supported the previous speaker. (Laughter.) The Union continued to import foodstuffs wholesale, and if guano were sold cheaper, local production would be stimulated. (Cheers and laughter.) A grain-farmer’s life was not an easy one, though hon. members, by their levity, appeared to suggest that it was. (Laughter.)

said every year they had listened to the same whine for cheaper guano. The Guano Islands were the property of the taxpayers of South Africa. Why should they be given away to a certain section of the community? The guano was worth about £12 a ton in England. Last year the Government sold 6,373 tons, and it made the Cape farmers a clean present of £25,000. If the farmers had the guano at £6 a ton, they would want it for £5 next year, and so on. Proceeding, Mr. Jagger said he noticed that the Superintendent of the Guano Islands made a strong plea for a steamer instead of a sailing ship, but he (Mr. Jagger) warned the Government against putting on a steamer.

regretted that Mr. Jagger should take up such an attitude against the farmers, and said that the harbours had also lost money, for which all the ratepayers of the country had to pay. He hoped that something could be done to reduce the railway rates on guano, some of which came to £1 per ton. He advocated the removal of guano from the South Coast.

said that there was a great deal of goat manure on the Karoo—(laughter)— which was sold at 3d. a bag, while in Stellenbosch they had to pay a shilling. He wished that something were done to reduce the railway rates, so that more could be sold.

said that the hon. member for Cape Town always looked at matters of agriculture in the light of pounds, shillings, and pence; but when it came to harbours that was quite another matter. They had spent £4,000,000 on their harbours, and some of them, like Cape Town, were run at a loss. They paid £6 per ton for guano, and in addition to that they paid railage. The profit they made came out of the pockets of the farmers. This was a South African product, pure and simple, and it should be used for the development of the country. If they were to look at these matters in the Jeremiah spirit, they would never become a great country. (Hear, hear.)

pointed out that in other countries the farmer got 25s a quarter at the elevator, as compared with about 42s. a quarter here.

said that he made the deliberate statement that at 15s. a bag wheat did not pay the farmer.

said it would be advantageous to the farmers themselves as a class to sell the guano in England. At present only a small group of farmers derived any benefit from the low price charged here.

said they should carry guano as cheaply as possible in order to encourage the refertilisation of exhausted soil.

supported the previous speaker, but thought that the Western Province would benefit even more if goat manure were carried at reasonable rates.

said that the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, who was a mighty importer of fertilisers—(laughter)—was to blame for the introduction into South Africa of exotic pests —(loud laughter)—for which the country had to pay huge sums annually. Could they acquiesce in a policy of that description for the sake of feathering the hon. member’s nest? (Laughter.) The hon. member was very plausible where his own pocket was concerned.

reminded the hon. member that personal reflections were out of order.

said he thought the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, was equally personal, because he twitted the farmers with making selfish demands year after year.

said that he would see what could be done to cheapen guano, although he did not think much could be done. There might be a danger of the supply running short, and if the price were lowered, the supply might not be sufficient to cope with the demand from the whole of the Union.

thought it would be best not to send this guano to Europe. At the present moment, instead of exporting this material, the Government should build cement tanks for its storage, because there might come a time when they would want it.

said the Convention spirit was to treat all alike. Here they were selling guano to the farmers at £6 per ton, whereas they could get £12 for it in London? They were, therefore, seeking to benefit one part at the expense of the whole.

asked why should they grudge the Western Province farmers the privilege of getting the guano cheaper because they were geographically better off? They should not begrudge any support that Government might be able to give to any industry.

The sub-head having been agreed to, sub-head S was put and agreed to, whereupon progress was reported, and leave granted to sit again on Wednesday.