from Ivor A. Rees, served in Law Department.

from S. W. Snyman, Assistant Resident Magistrate, Belfast.

from Gerard Gother Mann, late Assistant Superintendent, South African Railways.

Schedule of Pensions as at 30th September, 1911, excluding pensions payable by Railways and Harbours ; Natal Finance and other Accounts, 1st July, 1909, to 30th May, 1910, with Report of Auditor-General.

asked when the report of the Financial Relations Commission would be available.

replied that he had seen the chairman of the Commission the previous day, and had been informed by him that the report had been signed and was now being printed. The report would, he thought, be available some time next week.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours whether he is aware that extremely dirty and verminous passenger carriages have recently been running on the Natal section of the South African Railways, and, if so, what steps he has taken to prevent a repetition of such a state of affairs?

The Administration is not aware that verminous carriages have recently been running on the Natal section, and while the coaches may not, during the recent holiday season, have been kept quite up to the standard of cleanliness that the Administration would wish, due to the excessive demand on the stock and the short time it has been allowed to stand at depot stations, every endeavour has been made to keep the carriages as clean as possible. One hundred and eighty-five coaches were thoroughly fumigated in Natal during the months of October, November and December last, eleven coaches having been reported as being verminous, but no trace of any vermin could be found. Passenger coaches are systematically fumigated at the principal centres every two months, but the work has of necessity fallen somewhat into arrears during the holiday season, owing to the pressure of traffic and the shortage of rolling stook. The fumigating agent is hydrocyanic gas.

asked the Minister of Agriculture: (1) Whether the Government will reconsider its decision in regard to the nursery on the farm Vergenoegd in the district of Marico and re-open the same so that the planting of trees in the said district may be promoted ; (2) what were the annual expenses and the annual income since the said nursery was established ; and (3) what was the reason for closing the nursery?

asked that the question be allowed to stand over till Monday for a reply.

asked the Minister of Finance whether the Government is aware that in the Orange Free State transfer duty amounts to four per cent., and that in default of payment within six months that amount is doubled, m addition to interest amounting to ten per cent. and stamp duty, while in the Transvaal this duty amounts to only 1¼ per cent. ; and, if so, whether the Government is prepared, during the present session, to take the necessary steps to secure a uniform transfer duty?

The Government is aware that the enactments governing the imposition of transfer duty vary in each of the four Provinces, but no steps have yet been taken to introduce a measure for the unification of the various Jaws, as it is understood that the report of the Financial Relations Commission will make important proposals regarding the treatment of transfer duty. Pending the receipt of the report the matter will be left in abeyance.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) (a) Why do boiler-fitters, blacksmiths and carpenters employed at the Cape Town Docks get more holidays than plumbers, painters, masons, shipwrights, and crane-drivers also employed at the same Docks: (b) why do the former draw pay for such holidays which the latter do not ; (2) why does a workman employed in the Railway Department get a free railway ticket if employed at Salt River, whereas if he is employed at the said Docks he does not, notwithstanding that he may have to leave his home earlier and return later ; and (3) why do the outdoor staff employed at the said Docks who are exposed to all kinds of weather (a) not get full sick pay, while the indoor staff which does its work under shelter gets full sick pay ; (b) not get as many holidays or the same leave as the indoor staff which works for less hours?

(a) Boiler-fitters, blacksmiths, and carpenters employed at Table Bay Docks do not ordinarily get more holidays than plumbers, painters, masons, shipwrights, and crane-drivers employed at the Docks ; (b) nor do the former ordinarily draw pay for holidays, which the latter do not. Unfortunately, however, a copy of the notice issued by the mechanical branch for the guidance of the workmen at Salt River, in regard to the holidays on Dingaan’s Day and Boxing Day, was inadvertently sent to the men at the Docks, with the result that men under the jurisdiction of the mechanical branch were paid for these two days, while those in the employ of the transportation branch were not. The leave regulations applicable to harbour employees are governed by Cape Treasury Circular No. 1,269 of the 8th October, 1906 (which circular is still in force pending the assimilation of the leave regulations in the different sections of the service), and are totally dissimilar to the railway leave regulations in force at Salt River Works. (2) The Salt River workmen are granted free railway tickets available by the workmen’s trains only. Free travelling facilities have not been extended to the harbour officials, but in terms of the Cape Free Pass Regulations—the free pass regulations have also still to be assimilated—they are granted quarter-fare residential tickets from the suburbs to Cape Town, and a concession ticket on the Dock trains at the rate of 3s. 6d. per month (3) (a) Harbour employees are now treated in the same manner as the railway staff in the matter of sick pay and sick leave, which is governed by the sick fund regulations, in which provision is made for only one-third pay to non-contributors to the Civil Service Pension Fund. (b) The regulations relating to leave applicable to officers and employees at the Table Bay Harbour are, as already stated, contained in Cape Treasury Circular No. 1,269, dated October 8, 1906, which does not provide the same leave facilities for the indoor and outdoor staffs. Differentiation in leave and other privileges exist, not only as between the harbour and railway services, but also between the regulations in force on the railways in the different Provinces. A committee was appointed to investigate and report upon the question of assimilating the conditions of service, and leave and other privileges in operation in the different services prior to Union. The report of this committee has been received, and is now under consideration.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours whether his attention has been drawn to an alleged complaint as to the conduct of the stationmaster at Panbult Station, and, if so, whether he intends to institute an inquiry, and if the alleged complaint is proved to be well founded, whether he will take such steps, either by dismissing the said official or imposing adequate punishment, as will ensure that the Dutch-speaking section of the community will be treated with due respect, and that the provisions of section 137 of the South Africa Act are carried out?

Attention has been drawn to the complaint in regard to the alleged misconduct of the stationmaster at Panbult Station, and arrangements have been made for a thorough investigation to be made on the spot, the result of which will be communicated to the hon. member for Marico, who will also be advised of the action, if any, which it may be found necessary to take in the matter.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs for what reason the annual free pass has been withdrawn from the Travelling Post Office staff of the Cape Province ; whether it is not the fact that these passes were included in the privileges of the Travelling Post Office staff prior to the Union, and whether it is the intention of the Government to grant the officials concerned any compensation for the loss of the privilege?

replied that the privilege was withdrawn after Union, the Railway Department having no doubt, arrived at their decision on the principles laid down in the South Africa Act

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours whether it is his intention to define the duties and powers of the Railway Board appointed under section 126 of the South Africa Act, and, if so, by what means and when?

said that he did not know exactly what the hon. member intended to convey, whether he wished a definition by statement or legislation. The question of introducing legislation to deal with the matter had been under consideration for some time. When a decision was come to it would be announced.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether he is aware (a) that recently an order was issued by the General Manager, South African Railways, prohibiting husband and wife travelling in the same compartment ; (b) that because no Durban coach is attached at Pretoria, ladies frequently suffer great inconvenience at Germiston, and that on several occasions ladies who have paid first-class fare at Pretoria have had to travel in a third-class carriage ; (c) that whilst men who hold excellent credentials from the South African Railways have been refused employment, in one case the employee of a private firm has been engaged on night shift, and in another case a convicted thief has been employed as guard ; and (2) if so, whether he will take steps to cause these conditions to be changed?

(a) No order has been issued prohibiting husband and wife travelling in the same compartment. (b) A through coach is provided between Pretoria and Durban, and vice versa, on the corridor daily trains, but on three occasions during December a through saloon was not attached owing to shortage of coaching stock brought about by the heavy passenger traffic with which the Administration was called upon to deal. On the three occasions in question accommodation was, however, reserved for Pretoria passengers in the train from Park Station, and the Administration is not aware of any instance in which ladies holding first-class tickets were placed in third-class carriages. (c) (1) The Administration is unable to trace in its employ an employee of a private firm said to be engaged on night shift. (2) The Administration does employ a man convicted of theft and this case is under consideration.

asked the Minister of Justice whether the Government intends to introduce legislation during the present session prohibiting male natives working alongside European women and girls in factories, as is the case in the dynamite factory in the Transvaal, in order to prevent such a state of affairs in the community?

asked that this matter be allowed to stand over for a few days.

asked the Minister of Mines: (1) Whether his attention has been drawn to a case heard before Mr. Van den Berg, First Criminal Magistrate, at Johannesburg, on the 12th January, 1912, when W. Malone was charged with committing a breach of the Mines and Works Regulations “by causing a native to drill into or near a misfired hole on the 30th November last, thereby causing an explosion which inflicted serious injuries to a native, from the effects of which he succumbed” ; and to the fact that exception was taken to the summons on the ground that “the old regulations were not effective after the 17th November last, and that the new regulations controlling the Mines and Works were not valid until the 1st of December, and that between the dates mentioned there were no regulations in force,” which exception the Crown Prosecutor admitted he could not contest, whereupon the Magistrate was obliged to discharge the accused ; (2) who is responsible for this hiatus and neglect of duty ; and (3) what steps does he intend taking against the offending official?

replied that the question involved reference to certain papers in Pretoria. He accordingly asked that the matter be allowed to stand over for a day or two.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he intends to send a tobacco expert to the district of Vredefort at an early date to instruct farmers in the culture and manufacture of tobacco?

replied that inquiries were being made by the Agricultural Department, whose report would soon be available.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Government intends to take over the private land settlement at Roodepoort and Weltevreden, near to the Kopjes Irrigation Works, with a view to providing the said settlements with a better supply of water for irrigation purposes?

said that for the present there was no intention to take it over.

asked the Minister of the Interior: (1) When it is the intention of the Government to print and publish the voters’ roll of Parliamentary voters registered last year ; and (2) what is the reason of the delay in doing so?

There has been no unnecessary delay in the printing of the voters’ rolls, which have been in the hands of the contractors for some time. It is hoped that the last of the lists will be finally completed and proof read within the next few days, after which they will become available for issue and for sale to the public.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether the Government have entered into a contract with Mr. Henry Horace Wright, whereby a company called the “Union Steel Corporation of South Africa, Ltd,” has acquired the preferential right to purchase iron and steel scrap from the Government railway shops for a period of 16 years at £1 per ton for the whole of the Transvaal and a large district south of it, and at satisfactory prices for the remainder of South Africa ; (2) whether the Government have agreed during the same period to increase the railway rates on exported scrap, and to grant the Union Steel Corporation a reduced rate of transport of their scrap to the Corporation’s works ; (3) whether the Government have also agreed to place their orders for such iron and steed goods as the Corporation produce with the said Corporation ; and (4) whether the Minister will lay copies of such agreement on the table of the House?

eplied that he regretted he had to give this hon. member the same reply. The papers were on their way down.

asked the Minister of Justice: (1) Whether it is a fact that under the new regime it is necessary for members of the gaol staff in Natal to work for an average of eleven hours per day, with absolutely no intermission except during the period of 30 days annual leave, so that some men have been kept on duty for 23 or 24 hours at a stretch ; and (2) whether any members of the gaol staff are expected to sleep in the gaol hospitals, thereby being exposed to infection from diseases.

said that on behalf of the Minister of Justice he had to make the same reply in this case.

asked the Minister of Finance whether it is by his instruction that when property valued for municipal purposes at, say, £750, is, after having been put up at public auction bona fide, sold out of hand for, say, £500, transfer duty is demanded on such municipal valuation, instead of on such purchase price ; and if so, on what grounds?

The practice is, in cases of bona fide sales, to levy transfer duty on the sale price. The laws in force in the Cape, Natal, and Orange Free State permit transfer duty to be claimed on local valuation of the property if there is reason to believe that the sale is not bona fide, but the parties to the transfer, if they do not concur with the local valuation, may claim to have the property appraised. The Transvaal law provides only for the levying of transfer duty on the amount of consideration passing.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Government has any information to the effect: (1) That anthrax has been in existence in the Boksburg district since November last, and that the centre of its location is a place occupied mainly by dairy farmers, who, it is alleged, sell milk in the district, and that since the outbreak of the disease 24 head of cattle have died therefrom, while others are still suffering from the disease, and that one native has succumbed to the disease ; (2) whether it is correct that at the outbreak of the disease, whilst the police were proceeding to enforce the quarantine regulations, the Government removed the provisional quarantine regulations and allowed the owners of dairy cattle to sell their milk to the public, to the latter’s great danger and risk ; (3) if these allegations or any of them are well founded, what steps does the Government intend taking to forthwith stop the sale of milk to the public from cows suffering from anthrax ; and (4) whether the Government will cause any delinquent officials, as well as the offending owners of the cattle, to be prosecuted and punished?

requested that the question be postponed for a few days.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether he is aware of Notices No. 10 (amended) and No. 12 of December 8 and 6, 1911, issued to Salt River workmen with Tegard to Dingaan’s Day and Christmas and New Year holidays, and that under Notice No. 10 only employees who joined before December 17, 1907, and only white labourers engaged since January 1, 1910, were to be paid for Digaan’s Day ;(2) whether tradesmen in the service were paid for that day, and if not, why not ; (3) whether any coloured labourers were engaged since January 1, 1910, and if so on what grounds were they not paid ; and (4) on what grounds were similar distinctions under Notice No. 12 of December 6 made between employees in the service prior to January 1, 1910, and those engaged after, and between white labourers and coloured labourers in the matter of payment for holidays when workshops were closed?

(1) Attention has been drawn to Notices No. 10 (amended) and No. 12 of December 8 and 6, 1911, in regard to Dingaan’s Day and the Christmas and New Year holidays, and to the fact that employees who joined the service before December 17, 1907, and only white labourers engaged since January 1, 1910, were to be paid for Dingaan’s Day.(2) Tradesmen in the service were not paid for Dingaan’s Day unless they joined prior to December 17, 1907, as, according to the regulations in force on the late Cape Government Railways—which regulations are being acted upon, pending the assimilation of the conditions of service in the different parts of the Union—white and coloured daily-paid employees who entered the service prior to December 17, 1907, were granted 12 days’ holiday per annum with full pay, while those who joined the service on and after that date were only entitled to 9 days’ holiday with full pay, and consequently were not entitled to be paid for Dingaan’s Day. (3) Twenty coloured labourers have been engaged in the Salt River workshops since January 1, 1910, but these men, being engaged as temporary employees, receive no pay for statutory holidays, unless called upon to work thereon. (4) In terms of an arrangement made by the late Cape Government, all men who joined the Railway and Harbour service on and after January 1, 1910, were engaged in a temporary capacity, and were not, therefore, granted leave of absence with pay, except on the ground of sickness or injury on duty. This arrangement has not been disturbed, except in the case of indigent white labourers, who are granted 4 days’ leave per annum with full pay, viz., Christmas Day. New Year’s Day, Good Friday, and Dingaan’s Day. Other employees who joined the service between December 17, 1907, and December 31, 1909, although not paid for Dingaan’s Day, received payment for 9 statutory holidays. The holidays granted to the in digent white labourers were the result of an endeavour on the part of the Administration to ameliorate the conditions of this low-paid class of white employee. The question of the assimilation of the conditions of service, including leave and other privileges, has been dealt with by the Staff Committee appointed to inquire into these matters, the report of which has been received and is now under consideration. Other regulations, such as those governing admission to the service, appointments to be regarded as temporary, and the period of probation to be served by the employees before being admitted to the permanent staff, will be made uniform by, and as soon as possible after, the passing of the Railways and Harbours Service Bill now before the House.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether it is a fact that in most cases one trains foreman out of two on the South African Railways works 24 hours on Sundays, that he has to attend to telegraphic work, issuing of tickets, booking of luggage, abstracting of goods, the passing in the necessary messages for the safe passage of trains, and in addition to perform various other duties ; and (2) if so, whether he will cause the necessary changes to be made for the relief of such overworked workmen, and take such steps as may be essential for ensuring the safety of the travelling public?

replied that, as he stated the other day, he required certain further information before he could give a full reply. He would like it to stand over for a day or two.

(1) Why all the Transvaal field-cornets were reappointed, immediately after the conclusion of last session, by Government Notice 730 of May 1, 1911, for a further period of three years; and (2) whether this action of the Government’s is the only obstacle to introducing uniformity throughout he field-cornet systems of the Union?

requested that the question be allowed to stand over for a day or two.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether, during the present session, he will: (1) Take steps to prohibit during an industrial dispute, the importation of such labour as may be involved in the dispute ; and (2) to extend the Transvaal Industrial Disputes Act to the whole of the Union, and so to amend it as to take cognisance of dismissals for reasons in no way connected with the conditions of employment?

said he had been requested to state that the reply to the former was in the negative. As regarded the second question, the matter was still under consideration.

asked the Minister of Finance: (1) Whether the Government is prepared to take into consideration the advisability of supplying cigarette manufacturers with gummed excise and surtax labels, instead of those at present in use ; (2) whether the Government at first issued these labels in English with a picture of the King’s head thereon, and, if so, how many of these still remain in stock and how many have been destroyed ; (3) whether the Government has since issued new labels in English and Dutch, but without the King’s head thereon ; and (4) why these changes were made?

requested that the question be allowed to stand over.

asked the Minister of Finance: (1) Whether he is aware that a definite promise was made last year for a refund on a tobacco licence taken out by the holder of a club licence; (2) that the promise was subsequently retracted ; (3) that under pressure from another club licensee such refund in his case was actually made ; (4) that demands to take out tobacco licences are now being made on holders of club licences; and (5) whether such demands are in conformity with the interpretation of the law, and if not, whether he will give instructions to have such demands withdrawn and for refunds to be made where such licences have already been taken out?

said in this case also he wished the question to stand over. He would be glad to have further information regarding the incident.

asked whether the hon. Minister was aware that this was entirely a matter dealt with in the Cape Province, and that the papers were all here.

moved that all papers leading up to the arrest and prosecution of ex-Staff-Custodian E. McGlade, lately in the employ of the South African Railways at Mooi River, Natal, on a charge of contravening section 33 of Law No. 9 of 1882 (Natal), be laid on the table of the House. He said the matter primarily arose out of three cases which were recently tried in Natal and in which the railwaymen of Natal and other parts took intense interest. He was very glad to hear the Hon. the Minister of Railways and Harbours yesterday express his sympathy with railway men, and only hoped he had looked into this case with others and found out the details of it, and if he was not aware of the importance of it, he certainly should be, because an atrocity had been committed on a railway servant ; such an atrocity as he did not think had ever been perpetrated in any part of the British Empire. The matter arose in September last in connection with a man called E. McGlade, who was staff custodian at Moo River, one of the most important railway centres in Natal. This man had been the service of the Natal Government Rail ways and the South African Railways for eight years. He had a first-class character, and he was looked upon as one of the best men at handling the staff in the whole of the Natal section. In Natal they had got the electric staff system, by which it would appear on the face of it impossible for two trains to run on one section of line. But sometimes the human element came in, and if a mistake was made by two men consecutively something was bound to happen This man was doing his duty at Mooi River when suddenly District Superintendent Pritchard turned up from Pietermaritzburg and informed him that grave charges had been made against him—charges of gambling while on duty, and without a moment’s notice said: “Come along into the waiting-room and I will hold an inquiry.” McGlade went in and was informed of the nature of the charges for the first time. The inquiry lasted a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes, so far as he was concerned, and he was then told to go back and make a report of what he had done on the night in question. He was also told to tell the shunter to go and give evidence, and do his (the shunter’s) work while he was away. Then he had to do three different sets of work: prepare the report, do the shunter’s work, and do his own. He had a great rush to do this and was greatly upset, but he managed to scrape through somehow. He took this report back to the superintendent, and was surprised to hear him say, without going into the matter further: “Well, there must be something in it.” McGlade went back to his duty, and, upset as he was, took the wrong staff out of the column, and sent a train on the down line with an up line staff. He sent the train away, and an accident occurred. There was a considerable amount of damage to property, and one man was seriously injured. He was not here to defend him on that point, which was at present sub judice, but in regard to the preliminary details. His crime was a petty one, and one that an archangel or the Minister himself might have committed. The man was dismissed from the service on October 10. There was some dispute as to whether he should be refunded his payments to the superannuation fund. He was kept hanging about out of a billet. While in Johannesburg, he (the hon. member) saw the Assistant General Manager of Railways, and was told that the reason for the delay was that the Law Department was inquiring into the matter, but had decided not to prosecute, and as soon as this was confirmed officially, the repayment would be made. The Minister in charge of that department was, as usual wandering about the country. Eventually they informed McGlade that they were not going to prosecute, the repayments were made, and he received a first-class testimonial from the Railway Department and was informed that nothing was to be done to him. The Natal men had got a good friend in Mr. E. R. Ross, formerly General Manager of the Natal Railways, but for whom no use was found under Union. The Rhodesian Railways snapped him up, and he had founded a little paradise up North for Natal men, who had become thoroughly dissatisfied with the Union Administration. This man wrote to Mr. Ross, and immediately got an appointment. He settled down in Rhodesia ; but at the end of two months received a subpœna to proceed to Estcourt to give evidence for Hugh Rhodes, the driver of the train that travelled with the wrong staff. He went down to Estcourt to give evidence at considerable inconvenience to himself. Then, as the man was going into the witness-box, be was informed that a warrant had been issued for his arrest on exactly the same charge as that preferred against the man in the dock. He was told that anything he might say might be used in evidence against him. (An HON. MEMBER: “Shame!”) He (the speaker) thought it was one of the greatest shames he had ever heard of. He wanted to find out who was responsible. Was the Minister going to take the blame, or was he going to throw it on the shoulders of an official? He considered that it amounted to contempt of Court to terrorise a witness in this fashion Further, he found that in such a proceeding there bad been a distinct breach of the Natal law. He was brought up on January 11, and tried for the offence alleged against him, and he was found not guilty, and completely exonerated by the Court, the Magistrate remarking that there was nothing against him. The Department had tried to make a criminal of this man, but failed. The hon. member went on to refer to the Natal Act of 1906 —still in force—dealing with the question of reciprocity in regard to witnesses—who were guarded against arrest—from a neighbouring colony. He pointed out that there had been a distinct contravention of the provisions of the Act, though the Minister might be relieved to hear that it contained no penalty clause. Still, the fact remained, that in taking such an action a crime had been committed. He hoped that the high official responsible would be dealt with in the same way as these men, and dismissed the service. They were told that the men were seething with discontent—could things be otherwise when such a state of affairs existed? These men, after all, were human, and it would mean disaster to the railways if cases such as the one be had mentioned did not form the subject of a searching inquiry by Parliament. It was the junior men of the service, who were in the majority, who suffered on such occasions, and it was the junior men who would cause the trouble if they were forced into it by the Department. These men had a difficulty in making themselves understood, and if they were not carefully handled trouble would ensue in the future. It was for hon. members to bring these matters forward, and he, therefore, asked that the papers be laid on the table.

seconded the motion.

said it was a pity that when a question of this sort was discussed hon. members took the opportunity to make a general disquisition on the railways the greater part of which was irrelevant. He had no objection to placing the papers on the table of the House, but be thought it was a great pity to discuss the merits of a case when only one person had received information. Perhaps he might have something to say about the matter later.

The motion was agreed to.

moved:

"That the Government be requested to consider the advisability of appointing a Commission to inquire into the possibility of utilising land in or near mining and industrial areas for purposes of settlement, more particularly in regard to the following questions: (1) The extent to which such land would be taken up by those engaged in mining or industrial occupations ; (2) the amount of land available for effective occupation ; (3) the conditions under which it should be offered for allotment ; and (4) the legislative changes, if any, necessary to enable such a scheme to be carried out.” The mover pointed out the importance of the matter, and said that last session the Government was good enough to extend its sympathy, though he was sorry to say it hardly ever was put into practice. He went on to deal with the Settlement Bill, and said it was a pity that the Minister in charge had not seen fit to incorporate provisions which were found to be absolutely essential in oversea legislation of a like character. He touched upon the measures passed in Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania, New Zealand and other colonies, and dealt in detail with the principles of those measures, in so far as they referred to the terms of the motion he had placed before the members of the House. We had two large industries in this country, the mines on the Witwatersrand and the railways, and these industries were both peculiarly adapted to land settlement for the employees. What did they find on the Witwatersrand? If members of that House were fully aware of what was taking place on the Rand, there would be a good deal of uneasiness in their minds. Hear, hear.) He hoped that the visit which distinguished legislators paid them last year may have enlarged their minds in regard to that great industry on the Rand, and have removed some of their prejudices. He was sorry that the legislators had not sufficient time to investigate the conditions under which the white employees lived, and he thought it was due to the Government to come forward with some sensible and practical measure designed to put an end to the restlessness among the population there. On the Witwatersrand they were getting tired of promises; they wanted something practical (hear, hear)—and, with the object lessons of other Colonies to follow, he was sure that the Minister would be justified in coming forward with a scheme to help these people to acquire their own homes. After quoting returns as to what had been done in this direction in Victoria, Dr. Macaulay pointed out that a large portion of the revenue of the country was derived from the work these men performed, and urged that it was the duty of the Government to come forward and lend a little of this money to enable these people to acquire their own homes. (Hear, hear.)

who seconded the motion, said he could not for a moment imagine that there could be any opposition on the part of the Government to the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the necessity of enabling men, and particularly those employed on mines, to have a home in this country. They were often told that this was to be a white man’s country, and they all wished it to be a white man’s country, if that could possibly be, but if it were to be a white man’s country they must enable these men who came here to build their own homes. Where men were reaping such large salaries in the North, why did they find so much poverty amongst them? Because the men there, instead of using their money to build their homes, went in for gambling. (Hear, hear.) In the neighbourhood of the Rand there were many openings for small holdings, where men could go in for poultry, cows, pigs, etc., and have a market ready to hand

said that the Government had no objection whatever to accepting the motion. (Opposition cheers.) By that he did not wish to convey that they accepted in detail the references therein laid down or that the list was a complete one of the references that would ultimately be addressed for inquiry to such a Commission. But the object of the mover was one which the Government were very anxious to bring about, and it would fall under the general scheme of land settlement which the Government contemplated introducing. This question was not an altogether easy one. The central fact from which they started was of course that the proclaimed land had been taken out of the hands of the original owner originally only for mining purposes. It was true that under the Gold Law of the Transvaal the State had taken certain rights and had made an encroachment on the rights of the owner in regard to those proclaimed lands. In regard to land pegged out for mining purposes which was held by mining title, of course there the State had taken a larger share of the control. The Government could deal with the question in two ways. One way was under the Townships Act of 1907, and the other way under the Gold Law of 1908. As regarded the Townships Act the difficulty, which he had pointed out, was the central fact that the land was held for mining purposes. One of the objections held to applying the Townships Activas that as soon as there were 15 plots the land ipso facto by law became a township, and by the Cold Law, when an area became a township, no pegging was allowed there, and the mineral rights on all town-shin land belongs to the State. One could not proceed under the Townships Act because one thereby immediately interfered with the mining side of the proposition. Sections 68 to 72 of the Gold Law dealt more particularly with the ways in which the Government could deal with this proclaimed land, the land held under mining title. By that the companies could erect dwellings for their employees. Some of the companies, he was informed, had utilised this power, with very great effect too, and companies like the Crown Deep and others had erected dwellings for their employees, on this land held under mining title, which was very much appreciated. Only they were faced with the difficulty of not being able to obtain large enough plots, and the men complained that there was not sufficient land attached to these dwellings to enable them to carry on gardening, poultry farming, and other things of that kind. As regarded the outside land, that had been proclaimed, but was not held by mining title, the rights which the State had taken in regard to these were more restricted. They could be used for the purposes enumerated in section 69 of the Gold Law, but certainly not for the purposes the mover of this resolution had in mind. The law at present did not allow for that, and the reason why the State had not done more was because it had to a certain extent to interfere with the rights of owners. The farm was proclaimed for mining purposes, but the ownership of that farm remained in the owner, and at any time a mine was worked out the owner had a reversionary right. In the case of a large area like Johannesburg these questions were perhaps not so important, but when they dealt with an outlying proposition, a small mine, which might be worked out in a comparatively short time, they proclaimed a much larger area than was apparently required, because the locality of the mine, and so on, were not matters of such great certainty. The result was that if they there applied a very stringent law which would be quite applicable to the area round about Johannesburg they might create very great trouble. Of course, matters of this kind must be looked into. But he might say that the Government intended to work in this direction. They believed that the objects contemplated by the motion were very excellent indeed, and if the legal difficulties were inquired into and steps taken next session to remove them, there should be very good results.

was sure that they were all very glad to see the sympathetic way in which the motion had been received by the Government, and he thought that the Minister might go a little further than saying that the matter might be put right by an alteration next session. He pointed out that during this session they would have an opportunity of putting the matter right, at any rate, in so far as land in unproclaimed areas was concerned. The Minister had quite correctly stated that one of the difficulties in the way of such a settlement was that under the Townships Law of the Transvaal, if land was cut up into more than fifteen plots, it, ipso facto, became a township, and the mining rights thereupon passed to the Government. That matter had been brought before the notice of the Government some time ago, and nothing had yet been done. He did not think that it was the intention of the Legislature of the Transvaal when the Act was passed that this should be the case, but the effect remained, as the Minister had pointed out. There had been published in the “Gazette” a draft Bill consolidating the Townships Acts, and he regretted that in spite of representations made on this subject the matter had not been touched, and the law remained exactly as it was. There was no definition of township, and the matter therefore remained as laid down in the Townships Act of the Transvaal. He hoped, therefore, that when the Townships Bill came before the House this session, as he presumed was the intention of the Government, the Minister would take the opportunity to regularise the matter, because there were certain areas in the Witwatersrand awaiting settlement. There were numerous applicants, and nothing in the way except this provision, which could be removed by a stroke of the pen, so to say. He hoped that the Minister would not defer this matter to next session: the question of settlements on proclaimed land was of course, a different matter. (Cheers.)

welcomed the Minister’s statement that the Government was willing to appoint a commission. But he was somewhat afraid of all these commissions, especially in view of the tardiness which they often showed in the issue of their reports. The proposed Commission would have a very difficult task to perforin, as it would have to deal with private rights. It was perhaps easier to create settlements on goldfields, but the speaker doubted whether the project was advisable, and considered that the Government should be very careful. There was great scarcity of water in Johannesburg, and since October no water had been available for watering private gardens ; if therefore settlements were created, the Government would have to provide sufficient water. Advances would also have to be made to those settlers, as was now being done to the farmers by means of the land banks.

thought that the thanks of the House were due to the Minister for the sympathetic way in which he had treated the matter. The subject was not a new one. In 1905 the miners of the Rand petitioned Lord Milner thereupon, but without avail. He did not wish to see those lands which, owing to their proximity to the markets, would become more and more valuable, fall into the hands of any private people. The idea was that the land should be leased to the miners, and revert to the Government at the end of the lease. Then the Government would always be in a position to carry out its obligations to the actual owner of the land. The necessity for this needed not to be enlarged upon. The Government knew full well that the mining industry was now being followed by people who did not follow it in the past. There was a number of agriculturists working underground who would be glad to have a little land to cultivate, and by which to augment their pay on the mines. He thought it would be a good scheme, and a commission, as had been proposed, would soon be able to get to work and formulate a sound scheme.

said the hon. Minister had mentioned election talk ; but he thought, if he would cast his mind back, he would find it dated from further back than the elections. (Hear, hear.) He supported the motion, which proposed certain rare and essential steps. He did not think that any ready-made scheme put before the House would bear analysis. For instance, the proposal of the hon. member for Commissioner-street, that the Government should give leasehold titles, and that the land should revert back to the Government, sounded all right ; but who was going to compensate a man for his improvements? The Government? He thought not, and yet without such provision that was a fatal proposal. He differed from the hon. Minister on one point, when he said the question was much more important in the areas up-country, where the mines were not so concentrated, because the area of land proclaimed was so great in proportion to the mines. The fact was that an owner has a defined share and right in the discoveries, and looks to that to compensate him. He did not think he counted upon the reversion of the deproclaimed land.

It depends upon whether he makes anything or not.

Yes; it depends upon that. Proceeding, he said he thought they could overrate that asset, the reversion of the farm after the proclamation. He did not think it was to be compared with getting settlers on the land. But the need was greater on the Witwatersrand because there they had more people. They had a perishing industry. There would come a time when there would be no mines, and nothing was really being done to provide occupations for the population that was drawn to that part of the country. They could not do it in a day or in a generation, and he thought the first thing to be done was to get information. If they had a Government Commission he hoped they would get some of those people who were sincerely interested in the matter and underpay them thoroughly, so that there would be no inducement for them to remain on the Commission after they had done their work. (Laughter and applause.) They would find gentlemen who would volunteer to do that work fox nothing, because it went a great deal further than the settlement of a few men. They were going to deal with the phthisis question. He mentioned some time before the possibility of providing areas in which men afflicted with the earlier stages of that complaint could get land on which to live. They could not make farmers out of miners, but they could get men to take up land to relieve the strain on their purses while they were regaining their health. There were many miners who could work and get something out of the ground, and live there cheaply during the period they were trying to recover their health. (Hear, hear.) But they always had the white labour question. This touched the bottom of it. The reason why they had not white labour in this country was because there was no alternative for men who came out here. A man comes out as a mechanic with £20 in his pocket, and had to live on it, and when he had finished it he had to starve or leave, for he had nothing to turn to. In other countries a man went out—in New Zealand, Australia, the States, and Canada—with £20 ; but he could get employment. There was no native population there, and the whites had to do the underwork. A man could go anywhere and could get his living, his existence, and could generally get a fair wage. It was something to keep him going until he got his experience and knowledge of the country. Here he could not do it. The presence of the native population meant that the underwork that would go to him in other countries was taken from him and there was no prospect of him getting aid until they had people settled on the land. (Hear, hear.) When the mines shut down the field of employment open to them would go. They would go out of the country and were called birds of passage, but they were not. Let them try and set to and provide them with an alternative. (Cheers.) He was very pleased that the hon. member had brought this forward and hoped the Government would take it seriously and would try and get some information about it. There were people who were available, who would tell them what was available within ten miles of the Witwatersrand. They could get this information and then would know what land there was available. The hon. member was right. They could not make farms or even flower gardens upon sand dunes and cyanide water. But there were places to be had that would suit. (Cheers.)

said it had not been his intention to speak, but he had to do so, because he thought Sir Percy Fitzpatrick had made a serious mistake. The experts long ago exploded the idea of the value of freehold. The hon. member for Denver (Dr. Macaulay) quoted New Zealand, but most people would tell them that Queensland and South Australia were the best examples. He sincerely hoped when the Government made a move they would follow one or other of the two. The procedure was: When the areas were proclaimed the mines were allowed just as much land as they wanted to use. The rest was cut up and called lease or residence areas. A man applied for that, and it was his for 99 years. That method had been applied with the greatest possible success, and in every case the land was leasehold. He believed there were many gentlemen on the West Rand who were in hearty accord with the scheme and would help the Government in every way.

The motion was agreed to.

moved for a return showing: (a) The number of public servants transferred from the Cape, Free State and Natal Provinces to the Transvaal; (b) the cost of such removal ; (c) the total annual amount of extra emoluments paid to such officials ; (d) the number of men re-transferred from the Transvaal owing to the lack of accommodation or other causes ; (e) the number of men whom it is the intention of the Government to remece from the Provinces to the Transvaal ; (f) the new appointments made in the public service since June 1, 1910, showing in each case the salary paid, whether the persons were in the public service of any of the four Provinces at the date of appointment, and also the names of retrenched officials who have been re-employed. He said he had no intention of taking up the time of the House with a lengthy speech. He would like to see the various items extended, and his great object, or one of them, was to get from the Government a statement.

seconded.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that the petition from J. F. Herbst and 147 other inhabitants of St. Mark’s, Transkei, and Queenstown, presented to this House on January 50, in favour of increased railway facilities, be referred to the Government for consideration. He said the petitioners resided in an East Coast fever area, and they were in the neighbourhood of one of the largest ports of entry and exit of the great Transkeian Territories, and from which emanated most of the transport for the eastern system of railways.

seconded, and said that the short line proposed would be of immense benefit to the central part of the Transkei.

said he hoped that the Minister would grant considerable railway extensions in the Transkei.

The motion was agreed to.

moved for a detailed return of the amount paid in travelling allowances to the officers and staff of the Railway Department during the year ending December 31, 1911. The mover was understood to refer to the travelling of officials, which involved a considerable amount of money. Officials went up and down the line and all seemed to be doing the same kind of work. He was not prepared to advance evidence why the return should be supplied, but he wanted the information from the proper quarter. There was reason, he thought, for inquiry, but he would not be surprised if the return showed that the man in the street was wrong in his surmises. He proceeded to quote figures to show the increases in travelling allowances. He had had a lot of experience, he concluded, and, therefore, he had sympathy with those in charge of the railways.

seconded.

said he regretted he had been unable to hear all the hon. member had said. What he did hear, however, would have softened his supposedly hard heart if the remainder of the hon. member’s remarks had been of a critical character. He had no objection to laying the papers on the table, but he would point out that the cost of the return would be considerable—£50. He quite sympathised with the hon. member, and agreed that a return of this sort would do good. Many returns cost money to obtain, and were never looked at after being placed on the table ; on this occasion he thought it was the intention of the mover to put the papers to a good purpose.

The motion was agreed to.