in support of petition of John Blake van Renen.

from J. L. Knight, District Native Commissioner.

from J. L. van der Walt, teacher.

from R. A. Simmons, catering manager, South African Railways.

from W. Gray, late master tailor, Breakwater Convict Station.

from F. W. G. Rand, late of Cape General Post Office.

from H. Clark, widow of George Clark, late Inspector of Police.

to assist sheep farmers in exterminating vermin and keeping jackal-dogs.

in support of the petition of J. B. van Renen.

from residents of Alice, for reduction of licences for the sale of intoxicating liquor.

from residents of Alice, for prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquor to aboriginal natives.

for the age of consent for girls to be raised above 16 years (13 petitions).

Return showing position of Railway Charitable Fund for ten months ended the 31st March, 1911 ; and for eight months ended 30th November, 1911 ; statement of accounts South African Railways and Harbours, 31st May, 1910, to 31st March, 1911, and the Auditor-General’s report thereon.

said that in regard to the mail contract, he understood that the Government was prepared to give some information to the House concerning the negotiations that had been going on. In view of the near approach of the end of the contract—in September next, he believed—not only the House, but the country was extremely anxious to know how far the negotiations had gone, and especially whether the negotiations would come to such a stage before the House rose as to afford it an opportunity of expressing its approval or otherwise. He hoped the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs would be able to give them some information on the subject at an early date. (Hear, hear.)

replied that within a few days Government hoped to make a statement to the House in connection with the ocean mail contract and shipping matters generally.

asked the Minister of Railways if he had yet received the report of the Railway Auditor. They had had the report of the Auditor-General, but not that of the Railway Auditor, which should be ready when Parliament met.

said he would make inquiries. He hoped the report would be ready very soon.

asked the Minister of Native Affairs: (1) What acreage has been set aside for native locations within the Union ; (2) how many acres of the said lands are suitable for cultivation; (3) what numbers of natives could be placed on the present location lands without being overcrowded ; and (4) what number of natives are living in the locations at present?

A return containing the desired information will be prepared and laid upon the table in due course. With regard to (1) and (4), it may be mentioned that Annexure No. 8, attached to the report of the South African Native Affairs Commission, 1903-05, gives general particulars of the area of the native reserves and the native population residing thereon. With regard to (2) and (3), approximate figures only can be supplied.

asked the Minister of Lands: (1) Whether the mineral rights of two portions of the farm Holfontein, district of Bloemhof, have been sold under the Land Settlement Ordinance of the Transvaal to the present holders of the surface rights of these portions ; and (2) whether the holder of the remaining portion of the said farm also applied for the purchase of the mineral rights of his portion, but was refused ; and, if so, why?

I am informed that the lessee, under the Settlers Ordinance, 1902, Transvaal, of portion A of the farm Holfontein, No. 89, in the district of Bloemhof, Transvaal, inquired of the Transvaal Land Settlement Board whether, if she converted the lease into a licence, and paid the purchase price of the land, she would obtain full owner’s rights to minerals. The Land Board advised her in the negative. I am also informed that no application has been received by the Land Settlement Board from the lessees of portion B to acquire the mineral rights. The remaining extent, being the southern portion of the above farm, was leased under the Crown Lands Disposal Ordinance, 1903, Transvaal, for a period of five years from January 1, 1907. The lease provides for a renewal for two years, and gives an option to the lessee to purchase the land, with full mineral rights. I may mention, for the information of the hon. member, that this portion of the farm Holfontein was purchased by the Crown Colony Government in 1906 especially for the present lessee, who contributed an amount of £190 towards the purchase price.

asked the Minister of Lands whether the Government is in negotiation for the sale of, or has sold, the farm Avondster, adjoining the alluvial diggings on the farm Mooifontein, Bloemhof district, and if so, whether he is prepared to state (a) with whom the negotiations are being carried on, or to whom the farm has been sold ; (b) on what terms ; and (c) if to a syndicate, the names of the members of the syndicate?

replied that the farm Avondster, No. 331, in the district of Bloemhof, Transvaal, was leased in November, 1907, under the Crown Lands Disposal Ordinance, 1903, to Mr. F. J. Hennig. The lease was for a period of five years, with the option of acquiring the land at any time during the currency of the lease, or at the expiration thereof, on terms of conditional purchase extending over a period of 20 years. The area of the farm is 2,264 morgen and the valuation is £924. The lease contains the usual conditions under which Crown land is alienated, and contains a clause to the effect that all rights to minerals, mineral products, mineral oils, precious metals, and precious stones are reserved to the Crown. Mr. Hennig has exercised the option of purchase, and the Crown grant is now in course of preparation.

asked the Minister of Justice what was the number of prisoners awaiting trial on summary charges in Johannesburg on January 31, 1912, and how long had such prisoners been awaiting trial?

On January 31, 1912, the number of persons awaiting trial on summary charges was 228, who had been awaiting trial for different periods ranging from one day to 43 days.

asked the Minister of Mines when the Commission on Private Townships, appointed by the late Transvaal Government, on April 7, 1910, may be expected to report?

It is understood that the Commissioners have already drafted their report, and that it will be submitted to the Government about the end of the present month.

asked the Minister of Lands whether the Government has instituted or will institute an inquiry into the feasibility of constructing irrigation works in the South-Western districts of the Orange Free State, more especally in the districts of Fauresmith, Philippolis, Jacobsdal, Boshof and Hoopstad?

During the past year the irrigation engineers in the Southern Orange Free State have been fully engaged in attending to applications for professional advice from farmers and small municipalities. It has only quite recently been possible to obtain a sufficiently large staff of surveyors to undertake systematic reconnaissance work in this area, and operations will be commenced next month.

asked the Minister of Agriculture: (1) Whether the Municipality of Pietersburg has offered the Government three hundred morgen of fenced in ground, and more if required, of the commonage for the purposes of an experimental farm, and also £100 for labour, as well as to relieve the Government of the payment of £75 rent annually ; (2) whether the Government intends to avail itself of these favourable terms to carry out the unanimous resolution of the Dry-farming Congress at Pretoria to establish experimental farms wherever possible ; and (3) if not, what is the reason why a district which ranks third among the income producing districts is unable to receive consideration in this respect?

(1) The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative ; (2) I am prepared to accept the offer of the Pietersburg Municipality and to establish a small dry-farming experimental station there, and the Government will do its best to promote the practice of dry-farming, but it will not be possible to establish experimental farms specially for the purpose on the scale asked for by the Dry-farming Congress at Pretoria on account of the heavy expenditure that would be involved, and I am of opinion that the efforts of the Government will have to be mainly confined to experiments at the existing agricultural schools and experiment farms, several of which are situated in typical dry-farming areas, and to the giving of instruction on the subject and the carrying out of experiments in co-operation with farmers in the different districts ; (3) I do not agree with the reason advanced by the hon. member for the establishment of a dry-farming station in the Zoutpansberg district, as I am of opinion that it is the needs of a particular area and the welfare of the country at large, rather than the amount of revenue raised therein, which should influence the Government in taking up any particular line of work in a district.

asked the Minister of Finance: (1) What is the present interest of the Union Government in the National Bank of South Africa ; (2) is the liability of shareholders limited to the amount of their shareholding; (3) what amount of Government moneys is presently deposited with such bank ; (4) what are the bank’s assets ; (5) is the Government still represented on the bank’s directorate, and if so, what is the name and position of the representative?

(1) 13,000 shares of £10 each fully paid up. (2) Yes. (3) The Public Debt Commissioners have fixed deposits aggregating £926,000 with the Bank in South Africa, and the Treasury have £1,160,000 on fixed deposit in London. (4) I would refer the hon. member to the published balance-sheet of the bank. (5) The opinion was expressed in the House last session that the Government should not be represented on the directorate of the Bank by a Treasury official. In deference to that opinion the Government’s representative resigned his appointment on the Board, and he has not been replaced.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) What were the balances upon the following funds as at 31st March, 1911: (a) Depreciation (Railways) ; (b) Depreciation (Harbours) ; (c) Betterment (Railways) ; and (d) Betterment (Harbours) ; (2) whether these funds are secured by investment, and if so, in what manner, and at what rate of interest ; and (3) on what principle is the amount of depreciation determined, in the case of railways and harbours, respectively?

(1) Balances of following funds at 31st March, 1911, were: (a) Depreciation (Railways), £2,235,640 16s. 2d. ; (b) Depreciation (Harbours), £144,119 13s. 3d. ; total, £2,379,760 9s. 5d.: (c) and (d) Betterment (Railways and Harbours), £183,310 11s. 11d. Betterment Fund is a joint fund for both railways and harbours, contributions thereto from net revenue being made through medium of Appropriation Account. (2) Balances of these two funds are not specifically invested as such, but are included with all other railway balances, treated as a whole, and placed with Public Debt Commissioners for investment on behalf of Administration in terms of Act 18 of 1911. The rates of interest vary according to the investment. (1) Contributions are based on rates of depreciation determined by the estimated life of assets.

asked the Minister of Mines: (1) How many persons are now employed as shift bosses on the Crown Mines (a) on day shift ; and (b) on night shift ; (2) how many persons were returned by the Crown Mines under heading “Shift bosses” in the last returns sent in by the company to the Mines Department ; and (3) what was the date of such return?

(1) The Crown Mines now employ 21 shift bosses on day shift and 13 on night shift. (2) In the last return made by the company to the Mines Department 27 shift bosses were stated to be employed by the company during December, 1911. This is an average figure. (3) This return is dated the 24th January, 1912, and was the usual half-yearly return of white labour employed.

asked the Minister of Agriculture: (1) Whether persons who do not understand either English or Kafir have been brought down from the Transvaal to the Transkel accompanied with a turnout of mule wagons, etc., for the purpose of branding the cattle of the natives in connection with East Coast Fever: (2) (a) what has been the cost of bringing these men down ; and (b) what is their rate of pay ; and (3) whether the Government will take steps to effect economy in this direction by appointing some of the many Europeans in the Transkei who are thoroughly accustomed to work with cattle and thoroughly acquainted with the natives and their languages and who can easily be secured to do the work at a moderate rate of pay?

(1) The persons engaged in branding cattle on the Gape-Transkei border were sent from the Transvaal with their outfit ; their knowledge of the English, Dutch and Native languages is sufficient to qualify them for the work. (2) (a) They were provided with rail warrants from Pretoria to the Transkei. (b) They are paid £25 per month, out of which they have to pay for their camp outfit and equine transport. (2) It is anticipated that the branding along the border will be completed by the end of March, and to employ men unfamiliar with the branding of cattle and train them for the work for so short a period as it is anticipated the operations now in progress would take, would not have been conducive either to economy or efficiency. Should it be found advisable to undertake any extensive branding operations in the Transkei, local men will be employed.

asked the Minister of Public Works what is the reason why a Magistrate’s residence at Boshof, for which provision was made on the 1910-11 Estimates, has not as yet been built ; and when a start with the building will be made?

The reason why this house has not yet been built is that no satisfactory tender has been received, although tenders have been called for on two different occasions. A modification of the original plans is now being considered, and the work will be put to tender again shortly.

asked the Minister of Public Works whether it is the intention of the Government to complete the High Court Buildings at Bloemfontein by laying out the ground surrounding the building, and if so, when?

The work has been in progress for more than a month, and will be completed in May.

asked the Minister of Railways whether he is aware: (1) That certain railway officials recruit natives in the district of Standerton for labour on the railways ; (2) that, in some cases, existing contracts between land-owners and natives have been broken by the latter, on account of the higher wages offered them by these railway officials ; and, if so, (3) whether, in view of the fact that farming operations are extensively carried on in the said district, and that the question of labour there is a serious one, he will take the necessary steps to prevent a recurrence of such a state of affairs by giving preference, wherever possible, to Europeans, when labour is required for the railways?

replied that he was not aware that native farm labourers were employed as railway labourers, nor was he aware that contracts were being broken between farmers and native labourers. They always gave preference to white labour.

asked the Minister of Commerce and Industries: (1) Whether he has issued a Government almanac which advertises seaside resorts ; and (2) whether Port Elizabeth has been left out, and if so, why?

(1) Almanao advertising seaside resorts and other places of interest was issued by Railway Administration ; (2) picture of Port Elizabeth was not included, for reason that no suitable blocks were available. Almanac was prepared from coloured blocks previously used for folders advertising Gala Season, but as there was no Gala Season at Port Elizabeth, no folders were prepared, consequently no blocks were obtained with pictures of that place. I can assure my hon. friend it won’t occur again.

asked the Minister of Mines: (1) Whether any interim report has been received from the Miners’ Phthisis Medical Commission ; (2) if not, whether any request has been made by the Government to be furnished with an interim report ; and (3) whether any intimation has been received by the Government as to when the report of the Commission may be expected

replied that an interim report had been received, and would be published as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Agriculture: (1) Whether it is a fact that scab inspectors are not allowed to issue clean passes for slaughter sheep sent to the different markets ; and (2) if so, what are the reasons for not allowing the issue of such passes?

According to the new law, passes for the removal of clean sheep are no longer necessary, and provided a farmer’s sheep are free from scab, he is at liberty to move wherever he peleases within the Union.

asked the Minister of Native Affairs whether the District Native Commissioners have sent in their reports for 1911, as provided for in section 9 of Act No. 1 of 1909 (Natal), and, if so, whether these reports will be laid on the table of the House on an early date?

Reports required by section 9 of Act No. 1 of 1909 are being prepared by District Native Commissioners. The reports for 1910 were included in the Blue Book on Native Affairs for that year, and a similar course will be followed in the present case.

asked the Minister of Justice whether any alterations in the present organisation of the magisterial departments of Pinetown and Camperdown are in contemplation, and, if so, whether he is prepared to make a statement to the House on these subjects?

With regard to Camperdown, no alteration of the magisterial district is in contemplation. With regard to Pinetown, representations have been made as to the establishment of this Court as a detached assistant magistracy of the Umlazi Court. The report of the Public Service Reorganisation Commission on the subject is being awaited by the Government.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether the surveys referred to by him on the 8th instant in answer to a question on the subject of the completion of the Benoni-Welgedacht Railway line, are being made with the view to adopting a different route from that already decided upon for the completion of the said railway ; (2) if so, whether he will issue instructions to the surveyors to consider the convenience of the residents upon the Modderfontein and Van Ryn Gold Mining properties and the farms in their northern vicinity; and (3) in the event of the new survey bringing the line nearer to the business portion of Benoni than originally proposed, he is prepared to consult with the Benoni Municipal Council with a view to removing the goods shed and siding to a more convenient site than that at present in use?

(1) The reply is in the affirmative. (2) Object of surveys is to secure best and most economical route for serving these areas generally, and one which will be more convenient to New Modderfontein residents. (3) Whichever route is adopted gradients will not admit of goods shed and siding being moved to more convenient site.

asked the Minister of Commerce and Industries: (1) Whether he has taken into further consideration the representations of the Zoutpansberg Chamber of Commerce, made in August, 1911, urging that (a) the railway tariff for wood should be lowered to enable the owners of forests in the Northern districts to compete ; and (b) that when a general lowering of rates takes place, it should commence with the rates to and from the most distant parts of the Union ; and (2) whether he submitted those representations along with the others to the Government, and with what result?

(1) The answer is in the affirmative. (2) The representations made by the Zoutpansberg Chamber of Commerce were brought to the notice of the Minister of Railways by the Minister of Commerce and Industries, and are being kept in view in considering the changes contemplated.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether it is a fact that coachbuilders are being retrenched from the Pretoria workshops, and, if so, how many ; and (2) whether the Railway Administration is importing coaches from oversea, and, if so, how many are on order?

replied in the negative to the first question. Regarding the second, he stated there were 28 coaches on order, the reason being that they were urgently required, and the works here were too busy to undertake the work.

asked the Minister of Defence: (1) Whether the Government has decided to do away with the branches of the Ordnance Department at Umtata and Kokstad ; and (2) if so, whether, in view of the extent of the Transkeian Territories and the conditions therein, particularly the absence of through railway communication and the consequent difficulties and slowness of transport which have been accentuated by the ravages of East Coast fever, the Government will reconsider its decision and consider the advisability of retaining these branches?

(1) Yes. (2) With the continuing improvement of railway communication and the combination secured by Union of resources for dealing with any military emergency, the expense of retaining two ordnance depots at Umtata and Kokstad can no longer be justified. In abolishing these establishments, proper arrangements have been made for all ordnance services necessary for the districts formerly served by these two depots. The mule transport establishment of the Cape Mounted Riflemen has been recently increased and very much improved.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether it has been brought to his notice that an outbreak of anthrax has occurred at Klipdam, and, in view of his statement that no anthrax vaccine is a vailable at present, what steps his department is taking to deal with the outbreak?

An outbreak of disease at Klipdam has been brought to the notice of my department, and a veterinary surgeon despatched to that place to investigate it. So far the nature of the disease has not been determined, and the blood smears that have been received have not shown any traces of anthrax.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether, since the holding of the Imperial Conference, the Government has taken any steps with a view to securing for naturalised British subjects of the Union recognition throughout the Empire of their status as British subjects?

The steps to which the hon. member refers have to be taken, not by the Union Government, but by the British Government of the Imperial Parliament. The British Government has submitted a draft Bill for Imperial naturalisation to this Government for its consideration and concurrence, and the Government has expressed its agreement with the provisions of the proposed measure.

asked the Minister of Justice: (1) Whether it is a fact that Civil Servants transferred from the Cape Province to the Orange Free State receive allowances from ten to twenty per cent., according to salaries drawn by them, while Orange Free State Civil Servants do not receive such allowances ; and (2) whether he does not consider that equal treatment will give more satisfaction?

It is a fact that Civil Servants transferred from the Cape Province to the Orange Free State receive allowances in addition to salary, and that Orange Free State Civil Servants do not receive such allowances. The salaries of Orange Free State and Transvaal Civil Servants are held to include an allowance making up for the difference in cost of living in the coastal colonies and in the Orange Free State.

asked the Minister of Justice: (1) Whether he is aware that the Kafir labourers at Elandsput and Blaauwbosch diamond mines are at liberty to move about from noon every Saturday until the following Monday morning, and that they are not only a nuisance but a cause of anxiety to the owners of the surrounding farms ; (2) whether he is aware that farmers in that neighbourhood are continually complaining that their sheep are being stolen ; (3) whether the Government is prepared to make representations to the mine owners to establish a proper compound there for Kafirs, and if so, when ; and if not, why not ; and (4) whether the Government will, in the meantime, take the necessary steps to stop the nuisance to the fanners by prohibiting the natives to wander about on the days mentioned?

(1) No, natives are not at liberty to move about except under pass from the mine manager; (2) no ; during the year 1911 only two cases of stock thefts occurred, in one of which only a mine native was implicated ; (3) no ; for the propositions in that vicinity are small and the increase by Government for the establishment of proper compounds will result in preventing any prospecting or development work ; (4) this has already been done by the police having been instructed to make more frequent patrols.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether, in view of the isolation of Springs from the district of which it is the natural centre in consequence of the action of the Administration in not keeping its promise to construct the Springs-Witbank line, he will consider as favourably as possible the frequently expressed request by the residents of Springs for the construction of a line connecting Springs with the Witbank line at Geduld ; and (2) whether he will, for the convenience of the residents on the Springs gold mining property, cause a railway halt to be constructed at that place?

said that the first point was still receiving the consideration of the Administration. On the second point he would say that residents of Springs were reasonably served.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether the railway coal contracts for 1912 are settled yet ; (2) if not, when they will be settled and announced ; and (5) what is the cause of the unbusinesslike delay?

said that the matter would be decided that or the following day. The delay was owing to the first test not having been satisfactory.

asked the Minister of Education whether the Government will accede to the request of a number of students (articled clerks and others) in Johannesburg, who are engaged during the day, for the formation of an intermediate class in the evening, so that they may prepare themselves for the Intermediate examination of the Cape University, which takes place at the end of the year?

The Government has considered the request of a number of students in Johannesburg, who are engaged during the day, for the formation of an intermediate class in the evening, but it cannot accede to the request for the following reasons: (1) Though it is open to candidates to prepare privately for University examinations, the Government cannot subsidise the preparation of students for such examinations who do not attend the courses at recognised University Colleges ; (2) should the Government accede to the request of these students, such action might form an awkward precedent in the event of other centres preferring similar requests ; (3) the granting of such requests would militate against the interests of existing University Colleges, which are heavily subsidised, and of which there appear to be a sufficient number for the country’s present needs.

asked the Minister of Justice whether, in view of the answer given by the Minister of Mines on the 6th instant to a question on the subject of the trial of One W. Malone for a breach of the Mines and Works regulations, and in view of the fact that there has been an apparent miscarriage of justice, he will state what steps he is taking or intends to take in the matter?

said he was sorry he could not supply the answer to the question, and hoped that it might be allowed to stand over. He would point out, that judging from the question, the questioner was at a loss concerning his (the Minister’s) duties, because the prosecution now rested with the Attorney-General.

moved that Mr. Henderson be a member of the Select Committee on the Land Settlement Bill.

seconded.

said he had protested on more than one occasion against a small section of the House being ignored in regard to committees, and although this section took a deep and abiding interest on this matter of land settlement, they had not been considered in this connection. It would have been different had they been better acquainted with the rules of the House. He saw that the hon. member for Turffontein was on the committee, and hoped that the admirable sentiments that he and other hon. members had expressed with regard to land taxation would last until the Bill was discussed in the committee-room. He asked that an amendment by the hon. member for Commissioner-street substituting his name for that of Mr. Henderson, should be withdrawn.

said he would like to clear up the misunderstanding that had arisen on the previous night. He pointed out that the Whips had agreed to a certain course—that the committee should stand at ten members. There was a misunderstanding, and this accounted for the extremely invidious position in which the Minister of Lands found himself on the previous night. The position was—

The point has been cleared up.

said he had only intended to explain that hon. members on his side of the House had no objection to Mr. Henderson appearing on the committee.

withdrew his amendment, saying that it only remained that one section of the House was still unrepresented.

The motion was agreed to.

moved:

“That this House views with concern the discontent of employees of the Department of Railways and Harbours with the conditions under which they work, and regrets that by its unsympathetic attitude towards the employees and the low standard of living forced on men in the lower grades of the service by insufficient pay, the administration has given cause for discontent among so important a body of public servants.” He said that, before reciting the grounds on which he proposed to recommend this motion to the acceptance of the House, he would like to clear away one or two matters which might possibly take up the time of the Minister unnecessarily in replying. He wished to say that he did not desire to level any personal attack against any public servant in this matter. It was the Government and the principles of the Government as applied to railway administration which he attacked, and not any individual. The Minister the other day told them that he took very keen interest in the welfare of the railway employees, that he was always prepared to listen sympathetically to any complaint, that he himself investigated every complaint where he could and attended to it in a thoroughly sympathetic spirit. He (Mr. Creswell) had no doubt of that. But it was the principles which the Government brought to bear in the administration of the railways which they attacked. He would say that the unsympathetic attitude of the Government towards their employees resulted from the principles they adopted and from the interpretation, in fact, of the “business lines” upon which, according to the Constitution, the railways had to be run. They said that the Government, just as if they were large private employers, had made cheapness of result their one object and that everything else had to go by the board in order to do what they called efficient service. In pursuit of that aim, they were not content with the ordinary discipline which was in every organised business of any sort, but they wanted to have a sort of autocratic, despotic control over their employees. They found exactly the same fault with the Government’s principles towards their employees as they did with the great private employers of labour in this country—that they fixed their attention upon what was the cost of production. The whole of this discontent resulted mainly from the view which the Government took when they, apart from the ordinary discipline, checked and conditioned as it was outside by such instances as employer-made Acts to protect their interests, desired to have an absolutely autocratic and despotic control over the men in the railways. He knew the Minister would say, why do they bring these things up now, that a Grievances Commission was sitting, and that these matters could be considered when it reported? But the fact remained that that Commission, for which he moved in November, 1910, was not appointed until seven months afterwards, and that its report, even if it were received this session, would probably not be received until it was too late to be debated this session. These delays increased the discontent of the men. It might be said that the men could employ political action and that they had the right to combine politically. How did the Minister treat this right of theirs? He (Mr. Creswell) would point out that they had the famous Circular No. 7, which laid down that a man, if in the employ of the railways, though certainly he might vote, was not to take any part in elections in supporting publicly any given candidate or opposing any given candidate. Now, he would like to know why not? As individuals, how were they going to give real effect to such political rights as they had got, unless they could take as full a part in these matters as anyone outside? They could not combine to put up a candidate of their own. The hon. member proceeded to direct attention to the circular which forbade railway men to take any part in political meetings. He held that the circular was not in accordance with the terms of the South Africa Act, Clause 144 of which stated that “any officer in the public service of any of the Colonies … shall retain all his existing and accruing right.” He (Mr. Creswell) wanted to know by what authority the Government had dared, in violation of the Act of Union, to deprive the Natal railway servants of those rights which they enjoyed to the date of Union. That showed that in the pursuit of their desire to retain absolute autocratic control over the railways, the Government did not care a brass button about the law. He came to the next act of—well, he did not know whether it was in keeping with the Czar of Russia or the Sultan of Turkey! It was the regulation extending this disability to Municipal and Divisional Council elections. Whatever reasons there might have been for the original step, there was none for its application to Municipal elections. This was a piece of arbitrary tyranny that was as ill-founded as if the General Manager of Railways ruled that no employee was to stand for election as a member of a local cricket club. It was these little pin-pricks, these interferences with the ordinary rights of the men, that contributed towards the widespread discontent. Men wondered what the Government would do next to drive home the fact that they were not free citizens, but only railway servants. He imagined that in reply the Minister would call attention to the length of time spent by the House on railwaymen’s grievances, and would no doubt insinuate that the time of Parliament might be better spent. He largely agreed that there were other methods which would save the time of Parliament. In every industrial establishment, and in organised industries such as the railway, outside the Government service, men had their own methods, imperfect and inadequate though they might be. He would first deal with some of the conditions that illustrated his point. In the Transvaal, foremen received five shillings a day, and four shillings local allowance. If, as so frequently happened under the trip system, a foreman put in, say, thirty-four “days,” he received only thirty-four times five shillings, without the four shillings allowance. For overtime, he was paid only at the normal rate. That was manifestly unjust. He did not think the Minister would defend this if he was not tied down by the traditions of the service. He called attention to another hardship. On the amalgamation of the railways, the Charlestown and Volksrust depots were combined, and now they had the anomaly that men working side by side on the same sort of work were being paid at different rates. That was a certain way to foment dissatisfaction. The Minister would doubtless tell them that the Regrading Commission would deal with this. Well, it was now two years since Union, and surely business men would have entirely wiped out these anomalies by this time. Proceeding, the hon. member dealt with the trip system, which he characterised as another extraordinary way of trying to get the last farthing out of the men. Under it a man was simply paid for the trip, and received no extra remuneration should the trip last several hours longer than the schedule time. This was not the way to save time. If that was the Minister’s object, surely he could have recourse to ordinary methods and appoint inspectors. What was the remedy for all this? In other industries men formed unions and associations. The refusal of the Government to recognise railway servants’ societies was a colossal mistake from the Government’s as well as from the men’s point of view. If the Government wished to be relieved from trouble on little odds and ends, they should encourage the formation of such unions, and accord them full official recognition. How inconsistent the Government was! The Prime Minister, when Prime Minister of the Transvaal had agreed to the principle in the Industrial Disputes Act. It was the old, old story. The Government were taking the same view as employees did for the last fifty or sixty years. They said: We are desirous of treating our men well, and do not like outside intervention. They feared that by encouraging unions they would encourage strikes. The hon. member for Von Brandis had spoken about strikes as if they were something beside which the French Revolution paled into insignificance. He agreed that strikes were undesirable, but as he read the history of industrial development he came to the conclusion that for the last forty years it was by strikes alone that working-men had won their rights. As Mr. Chesterton truly remarked, “No one really gives attention to the working-man until the working-man stops working.” If the Minister wished to avoid trouble in the railway let him give instructions that unions amongst artisans must be officially recognised, and the men encouraged to join. He would find among the men a true appreciation of what was right and reasonable. There were cases in which men made complaints, but they never reached headquarters. Such cases could be remedied by the establishment of an Appeal Board. The hon. member then gave details regarding the case of a stationmaster who had complained that his hours were too long ; in some instances, they extended from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., Sundays and weekdays the same. At the end of December the stationmaster wrote to headquarters stating that owing to nervous breakdown the medical officer advised him to obtain leave. In reply, his superior said he would do all in his power to relieve him of work, but owing to pressure on the relief staff that could not be done at once. The pressure (observed Mr. Creswell) was due to the fact that the Administration was trying to run the railways without a sufficient staff. The next day the stationmaster replied that if something were not done, he would have to consider the matter of resigning ; at the same time, he protested against his treatment. His superior replied that he regretted to notice that the stationmaster’s letter was couched in an impertinent tone, adding: “No lack of consideration has been proved, and the fact that you have not proved a successful stationmaster is more a lack of ability than anything else.” The stationmaster had asked to see the General Manager two months earlier, but without avail. That was typical of what was going on throughout the length and breadth of the Union at the present time. He (Mr. Creswell) did not believe the Minister in the least bit sympathised with such a letter from headquarters as that which he (Mr. Creswell) had just read, but so long as the Minister insisted on the railways being run cheaply, so long was he making himself responsible for occurrences like this. He (Mr. Creswell) now wished to refer to another matter: that was, the low standard of living enforced by the insufficient wages paid to the men. He alluded to “three-and-fourpenny men,” as they were called. This rate of pay was commenced at a time when the Chinese were still in the country, and the avenues of employment were reduced to the lowest possible extent. The Minister of Finance, who was then the Transvaal Treasurer, was responsible for giving men work at this rate, and also for the inauguration of the use of white men in building railways. Bitterly opposed as he (Mr. Creswell) was to the employment of labour at this miserable wage, it was fair to say that at that time it was a great advance upon the position which had obtained previously. (Hear, hear.) In this respect, for once in the history of this country, the Government broke away from the old traditions that they must do nothing whatever to encourage white men to do rough manual labour. But then the credit stopped, for the present system was an iniquitous one. He knew what the Minister’s reply would be: “We are working the railways on business principles and can get men at 3s. 4d. a day.” Why was that possible? Because Government had helped its friends opposite to fill their works and thus reduced the opportunity of securing employment to the lowest ebb. If the Minister, instead of indulging in mere gibes, would take measure so that they would have to rely more on white men, then he would have no chance of getting men at 3s. 4d. a day. That rate of pay was nothing but sweating. The wife of one of these men had remarked to him: “Thank God, we have no children, and so we manage to pull through.” If an industry could not pay a sufficient wage for a man to keep himself and family in a decent state of civilisation it was far better that that industry should not exist. (Hear, hear.) He was not sufficiently hopeful to suppose that the motion would be carried, but he was hopeful that some members would signify their approval of the attitude the Labour members had taken up by voting for it. (Hear, hear.)

seconded the motion.

said the hon. member who introduced the motion had closed his speech by suggesting that members on that side of the House were in favour of a contented service. He had also spoken about business principles, but he would remind hon. members that it was bad business to bring this motion on at the present stage. He, also, was in favour of a contented service, and it was well to enlist both sides of the House on this subject. The hon. member had begun his speech by making the confession that he had a very small number of railway men among his constituents, which was undoubtedly true, because if he had been more in touch with the men themselves he would have been slow to bring forward his motion. He (the speaker) was afraid that party considerations weighed more with the mover than the real condition of the men. A Commission had been sitting upon these matters, and he, with others, thought it was a very businesslike method of going to work by having a general inquiry. The Minister of Railways had borne himself with exemplary patience under the circumstances, considering that it was an inquiry into the working of his department, and every facility had been given to make the work of the Commission as complete as possible. Why should the House not wait for that report before giving its opinion? If they were so go into the whole of the grievances of the railway men it would occupy a considerable time of the House, which he thought would not be well spent. The railway men’s society should be officially recognised, now that more than half the daily paid staff belonged to it, which he was glad to see, as he knew that all would belong to it. Promotion should not be left entirely in the hands of officials or subordinate officials. These minor officials had proved too much in the past that they were not to be trusted in matters of this kind. There should be certificates of competence, so that men should not depend entirely on the judgment of individual officers. Above all, there should be Appeal Boards, on which the men should be represented. But all these things would presumably be considered by the Commission. He admitted it was unfortunate that the report of the Commission was not ready, but he did not think the matter should be taken out of the hands of that Commission at this stage, and to do so would, he thought, be a bad principle to adopt. He would move the previous question.

seconded.

disagreed with the last speaker, who had said this matter should not come before the House. Their railway employees were respectable men of character and were rendering service of the greatest importance to the country, and for this reason their grievances should be considered by Parliament. He thought it a most important matter these men should be fairly treated and their excellent services recognised. They not only worked long hours, but suffered a number of disabilities, and not to redress their grievances would be from fatigue to endanger the safety of the travelling public. Continuing, he said that a Commission had been appointed, and he congratulated the House on the readiness with which it agreed to the proposal. At the same time, he thought they might have waited for that report before anything else was done. These things should not be done hastily ; time should be allowed for effective investigation. He did not think that the Minister was to blame for these things. He was sure that when the report of the Commission came before Government the grievances of the men would be remedied as far as possible. He thought that they might trust the Minister and the Government to do what they could for the men. He was inclined to think that these grievances arose from the petty jealousies and the despotic pettiness of some of their immediate superiors. It was not the head of the department, but the officers in the lower grades who were responsible, and it was their actions that gave rise to all this dissatisfaction. He believed they were on the road to a far more efficient railway service than had ever been the case. They should show the men that the administration was sympathetic, and so aid towards getting a more admirable and more effective service in the country. They should first receive the report of the Commission before they dealt in a hasty manner with grievances that were brought before the House. He did not intend to support the motion, though he acknowledged that he was in sympathy with it. He believed that the Government intended to remedy any grievances that might be brought forward.

said that these grievances had not been sprung on people during the last year or so ; his reading of happenings showed that the agitation was the result of a policy which had come from the Transvaal. He knew from practical experience the difficulties and disabilities under which the men laboured, and he had a distinct recollection that almost all the points which were being criticised to-day arose in consequence of a certain circular—No. 111—which was issued by the Railway Finance Committee in the Transvaal, on which the hon. member for Fordsburg sat as chairman. It seemed to him that the policy outlined in that circular was the policy of the South African Railways at the present time. The underlying principle of the circular was that the wages of the same grades of the service should be uniform, and be reduced by 20 per cent. But the men were not particularly docile, and they kicked, and there was some talk of a strike in the Pretoria shops. The authorities thought it best to meet the men and discuss the position with them. As the result, a Board was appointed, upon which there was equal representation of the men and administration. It was interesting to him the other day to hear certain hon. members on the right place the woes and grievances of the men before the House, knowing as he did that it was that particular section that was largely responsible for the policy that was being carried out at the present time. There was a Conference at Bloemfontein. The men obtained consolidation of pay and allowances. At the final interview, Lord Milner told them that they had got more than the Administration had been disposed to give. Since then attempts had been made to take away the benefits the men had gained, and also spread the circular policy in other parts of the country. After the Transvaal men had been robbed of their overtime pay by sharp practice and trickery, the policy spread to Natal, where the overtime rates were cut down by 50 per cent. The Government went further, and introduced the pernicious system of piecework at Durban. The men struck, and showed the Administration what they could do. There had been no extension of that system in Natal, though it was a blot on the Transvaal and Orange Free State sections. He was in agreement with the hon. member for Jeppe when he said that the whole crux of the question, the solution of the difficulties in connection not only with the railways but with other enterprises, lay in this, that the heads of the departments, the Ministers responsible, had got to recognise that the men engaged in the various grades of their departments or administrations had to have a say, and had got to have a voice in the conditions under which they had to labour. (Hear, hear.) There had to be less of the autocratic system of government and a little more democracy infused into the affairs of the Railway Department, in common with other branches of the Government service. He knew the employer said that he had a right to run his shop, his mine, or his factory, as he liked. The Labour party contended that the men also had a right to say to the employer that such and such a condition of labour, scheme of payment, or number of hours worked, were not good for them or conducive to their health and well-being, and the welfare of their wives and families. They were sick of “sympathy,” and the worker was beginning to understand that if he were to do anything or have anything done for him, he must do it himself. Hence the presence in that House of men whose English and grammar had been the subject of sneers on the part of hon. members, men who had been brought up in the stern school of the workshop and the mine, but who knew perfectly well what they wanted. Mr. Andrews gave an illustration of how the “trip system” was worked by quoting the times of working of men engaged on a train running between Pretoria and Braamfontein, and pointed out that the men were not paid for the intervals between the running of the train backwards and forwards, so that, so far as pay was concerned, the period of waiting at one end or the other was lost to them. Broadly speaking, he said the “trip system” was a piecework system. The theory seemed to be that the worker was a different kind of being to any other class in the community, that he was, naturally, a man who malingered. It had been said that drivers would take longer on the road if they were paid on the day-work system. Therefore, the system of “speeding-up,” of piecework, must be introduced. It was introduced in 1904, with the hon. member for Fordsburg as Chairman of the Railway Committee. That system still obtained. He said it was an insult to the workers that methods were applied to them in their daily avocations as if their one aim and object in life were to rob the Administration by doing as little work as possible for the money they received. (Hear, hear.) They had the piecework system in the workshops instituted for the same reason. What was the result? The highest skilled and most industrious men were brought down to the subsistence level or as near to it as they would consent to live, while those who were weaker or older were driven lower still, and everyone suffered in consequence. “Speeding-up” and “too old at forty” were the things that resulted from piecework, which, to his sorrow, had been introduced into South Africa by big Department of the State; a Department which, they were told, showed a profit of something like two millions a year. Then they had the question of overtime rates, which, as he said, were taken away by something very nearly approaching trickery from the Transvaal and Free State men in 1904. It was argued, and was still argued by employers, that if they paid a man double pay for Sunday labour or time and a half for ordinary overtime work, he would run after this overtime. But at did not work out that way. A man had to work when he was told or to clear out of the place. It rested with the Administration or the heads of the department and the various sub-heads to say when anything of this kind should take place. Immediately prior to this arrangement by which overtime and Sunday labour was paid for at bare time, he (Mr. Andrews) had never been asked to work on Sunday when a turner, because double time would have to be paid. Immediately “bare time” was instituted he was asked, and almost forced, to work every Sunday that came along. There were firemen on the railways who were working 26 days a month at 9s. a day. When they had to work 27 days they were paid 5s. a day, that is 9s. less 4s. allowance for all overtime. Some of these men were employed as firemen on mallet engines. He had asked these men what they lived on with this wage. Their reply was, coffee, bread and mealie " pap.” Probably the question arose with hon. members, “Has this man’s business got anything to do with me?” They explained it by the law of supply and demand. It was the cry of Cain again, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” But it was their business to see that no one in this country should be paid a wage which might lead him to starvation, to become a criminal, or to neglect his wife and daughters. The men had been prohibited from organising. It was exceedingly dangerous for a man to take a prominent part in industrial organisations. In spite of that the men were organised and continued to improve their organisation. Again they were denied certain political rights. That question was familiar to the House. The right to stand as a municipal candidate had also been taken away. There could be only one result of methods such as this. Compress air sufficiently and there would be an explosion. If no constitutional outlet were provided for the railway men they, being human, would put up with these disabilities to a certain point and then the explosion would come. He warned the Minister that there would come in this country an upheaval by the side of which the railway strike in Natal would fade into insignificance, unless something were done and done speedily to attend to the wants of the railway men. And they would not stand alone. The time had gone past in this country for certain sections of the workers to consider that they were apart from their fellows. There was a Miners’ Union, an Engineers’ Society, and others. It was in the hands of the administration and of Parliament to say whether a crisis would come or not. These men would stand together, and what they could not obtain by constitutional means they would obtain by means of one of those social upheavals such as they had seen in England and other countries during the past few years. In connection with the subject of fines and double punishment, he read a copy of a circular put into his hands. It was Railway Circular 121, dated October 7, 1911. It ran: “In the case of the temporary staff where an employee is arrested for some alleged crime, he should be immediately served with a formal notice, the period of which will, of course, be contingent on the terms of his contract, that his services will no longer be required by the Administration. I am relying upon you to rigidly observe the contents of this circular.” This meant a reversal of ordinary British methods of justice, as the man was presumed to be guilty when he was arrested. This seemed to be a most scandalous circular, one of the most high-handed he had ever read in connection with the railways. It might seem a trivial matter to hon. gentlemen who had never worked for wages, nor gone without bread. What did it mean? It meant death. It was a death sentence. If nobody else were willing to employ him he must die. There was no alternative. In various parts of South Africa he had met men who had been dismissed the service for some trivial offence, possibly owing to retrenchment, and they were unable to find employment on the railways throughout South Africa. Blacklisted! That was what it amounted to. They dismissed a man and took away his livelihood on the possibility of his being a criminal, or having committed an offence ; that was a most unjustifiable action for the Administration to take. (Sir E. H. WALTON: Hear, hear.) There was another large class of workers not yet mentioned—the Harbour men. These men also had some grievances. Men employed on tugs had to work exceedingly long hours. They had the towing of large steamers carrying passengers and valuable cargo. Owing to the department being understaffed pilots were overworked, so much so that sometimes they could scarcely see when entering the harbour at Durban. Further, owing to this pressure of work, ships were brought into Durban Harbour at double the speed good seamanship would allow, thereby endangering ship, cargo, and valuable lives. Proceeding, he said that he often wondered whether hon. members, when they were going to bed comfortably in their first-class saloons, not dreaming of anything in the nature of an accident, whether they thought of what was going on in the minds of some of the train officials. Hon. members were frequently dependent for their very lives on these men whom they treated so cavalierly here and elsewhere. He asked hon. members to consider not only those things which represented wealth, not only to be vitally interested in stock diseases, in the gold output, and the profit on the railways, but to give a little more heed to the thousands of men who conducted the railways, and made it possible for many hon. members to live luxuriously. He supported the motion. (Cheers.)

thought the discussion useful. He regretted the tone of some of the cross-bench speakers, and especially that of the last speaker. There was something of a covert sneer and covert threat underlying his speech. If one thing militated against railway men getting impartial consideration of their grievances it was such a threat as that voiced by the hon. member for Georgetown, that they would combine with another large section of workers and force by a strike what they were unable to get reasonably. The railway men themselves repudiated any such threat. He believed it was one of the articles of association that they absolutely repudiated the strike, and hon. members who made such threats were not doing their best in the interests of the workers. (Hear, hear.) This was surely not the right time to bring such a motion forward, when they had two Commissions sitting, the Regrading Commission and the Grievances Commission. Their reports were still awaited. True, men were suffering, but a Commission had been appointed, and could the Government or the House accept this motion while these two Commissions were sitting? Surely it would be better in the interests of the railway men, if not in the interests of the Labour party, that they should wait until the Commission had reported. At the same time, he supported the appeal to Government to recognise the railway men’s society. Unless they had a recognition of the principle of Trades Unionism there was the fear that men might be marked by some subordinate. (Hear, hear.)

said he had yet to learn that if a man uttered a word of warning he was an enemy of his country. If the hon. member for Georgetown (Mr. Andrews) had done nothing more than bring forward the circular to which he had referred, he had done a noble service. If the Minister of Railways did not disown the circular he would not be doing his duty. It was surprising that the hon. member for Uitenhage (Mr. Fremantle), of all men, should have moved the previous question. The hon. member for Klip River said they should wait for the report of the Grievances Commission. But did they know that the Commission was aware of the circular referred to by the hon. member for Georgetown? The duty of the House was to pass the motion ; it might have been worded less strongly, but still the subject to which it referred demanded attention. From all he could gather, there was discontent in the railway service; it might be unjustified, but it existed. The House had not the slightest indication when the Grievances Commission was going to make its report. (Hear, hear.) It might be a very long time before they got the report. He had received a circular on behalf of the railway men containing thirty-four cases. Some of them were not worth putting in the report, but at least half of them must have touched every hon. member as having a semblance of injustice about them. It was not asking too much that the Commissioner should accept the motion. It was possible that the hon. member for Uitenhage might be the puppet and that somebody behind was pulling the strings, and it was just possible that he had been utilised to move the previous question, but he (Mr. Brown) hardly thought that was the case, because the Commissioner was well able to take care of himself. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Brown) intended to support the motion, not because it was one needing sympathy, but because it was one of justice and because we wanted a railway service not engineered on the principle of paying 19s. 11d. for a pound’s work—(cheers)—but run on the principle that Government ought to be a model employer. (Hear, hear.) Even business principles meant that good workmen should be employed and the highest wages be paid, for that was just as necessary as good dividends. (Hear, hear.) In the Alexandria district a large number of poor Dutchmen were being employed by the railway at only 2s. 8d. a day. (Cries of “Shame.”) And there was a two-million surplus. These men had been driven from the farms and many of them had turned out to be excellent workmen. Most of them were well up in years, having reached that stage when a man was useless for ordinary life, but was good enough to be a member of Parliament. (Laughter.) Could there be anything but grievances when men were paid only 2s. 8d. a day? It might be said that coloured labour could be got for that. Well, then, take it. In conclusion, Mr. Brown repeated that he was going to vote for the motion, not as a motion of sympathy, but justice. (Hear, hear.)

said he would neither sneer nor threaten, but he would certainly not be doing his duty if he gave a silent vote. He could keep the House a full day with the evidence he had at his disposal. He had received a letter from a gentleman who came to South Africa with very handsome credentials from one of the English railways. The writer, who had been engaged on the railway in the Transvaal, said he had been dismissed purely on the strength of a native’s statement, and without even being given a hearing. It appeared that two natives alleged that they had paid their fares—2s. 5d.—to the writer, but that he absolutely denied. Proceeding, he concurred in what had been said by the member for Georgetown that it was dangerous for a railway man to take steps to protect himself. He also begged to bring to the notice of the Minister of Railways the case of a man at Park Station who was approached by an official and asked to make a statement on a certain matter. The man replied: “If I speak the truth, I shall get the same punishment as I received some years ago.” The man was assured that he would be protected, but after a few weeks he was shunted to what proved an unhealthy district, and after a while was invalided. The man wanted to appeal to the Minister of Railways, but he was promised that an inquiry would be held in his case. That inquiry had never taken place. In conclusion, he hoped the two cases he had mentioned would receive the attention of the Minister of Railways.

said he had listened with sympathy to what had been stated, but if they were to accept these ex parte statements and to come to that House and give them as gospel truth, he was afraid he could not agree with such a procedure. There was such a saying in America as “Sucking the goose.” (Laughter.) Members got these ex parte statements from railwaymen who had grievances —they might be real grievances—and the members, anxious to be agreeable for more reasons than one—he did not like to say these people had votes—(laughter)—accepted them as facts. He could say he had never had a railwayman approach him but what his case had been considered. It might be difficult for him to be approached, but in no case had he failed to look into a case. In the majority of instances where grievances had been brought to his notice, he found the statements extremely satisfactory, until he learnt the other side. Of course, until both sides are heard, one can never judge. He would advise hon. members in future when they are buttonholed to learn all the facts of the case. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth had said “the great majority of the complaints may be baseless, but I think we ought to vote for the resolution.” He would say, in the first place, that those grievances—he would not say “alleged” grievances—complained of have existed for a considerable time on the railway. Those on the C.S.A.R. had been complained of ever since the regulations had been in force, and so it was in the case of other complaints. He was quite prepared to admit that there was, perhaps, something more than an apparent want of sympathy on the part of those who had the management of the railways towards those employed, and sometimes he thought, not altogether without reason, many railway people were inclined to be despotic, and most of those were the railwaymen themselves, and the lower they went down the scale, the greater they found the men became despotic. He regretted having to admit that this tendency was more noticeable outside the Cape Province than here, and he hoped, this dissatisfaction would grow less and less, until it disappeared altogether. When a man felt it to be his duty to carry out a policy, it should, nevertheless, be done with due regard to all concerned. He believed in oiling the wheels as much as possible ; at the same time they needed to remember that they could not get through life without taking as well as giving. Whether it was in railway administration or a private business, what was wanted to make it a success was the co-operation of everyone connected with it. Take the trip system. That was not instituted by him. He was told it was largely introduced by the men and at the instance of the men themselves. This was one of the grievances which the Commission had inquired into. With regard to the trip system, piecework, and other questions, these were now before the Commission, which was sitting at the present time, and, therefore, he would not deal with them. How could he be expected to deal with these points when Parliament had appointed a Commission which was still considering these and other points. He was not going into the question of piecework, which was also a very difficult question. No doubt when they came to discuss that question, both sides of the business would be fully argued. He would point out that those grievances about which they were hearing such a lot were grievances that existed prior to Union, and, therefore, were not the fault of the present Administration. His hon. friend who represented Three Rivers had referred to the circular dealing with temporary men He admitted that it was rather harsh, but he did not think that that was sufficient reason to support the motion. He thought it was harsh because a man who was liable to the law was not necessarily a hopeless person. At the same time, he would allude to the fact that hon. gentlemen who sat further down the House were inclined to persecute an unfortunate man who had been employed on the railway. They said, “Look at the railway people” ; that day he heard that it was an offence to do the other thing. If a man was convicted of a criminal offence, then the railway was not for him. They had heard a great deal about the wives and children, but, unhappily, there was many a man who made himself liable under the law.

It is when a man is only charged.

I know. The principle is very much the same. Continuing, he pointed out that the temporary man could be sent about his business at any time whether he committed an offence or not ; the railways did with the number of men that was actually required, the same as any other large business. A great deal had been said about the small wages that were being paid to men, He listened with interest to the speech of one honourable member in which they were told that ever since they took over they had been paying this starvation wage. He would point out that these men were employed at a time when they had to choose between taking this wage and starvation, and he (the Minister) thought that they chose the better course.

Whose fault?

said he thought it was agreed that these men should be given a chance to improve their position. It was doubtful at the time whether they would be able to even earn the wages that were paid them. Since then they had improved a good deal, and many of them had turned out very excellent men. But when they spoke about 5s. 4d. a day and 5s. 6d. a day, hon. members were not quite fair. They only got 5s. 4d. and 5s. 6d. a day for one month ; after that the pay was gradually increased to five shillings.

Not in the Cape.

said that he was alluding to the Transvaal. Every morning they had the Johannesburg press writing about this starvation wage that was paid. It was not the truth. They would say that that was a strange thing for a newspaper. (Laughter.) These men began at 5s. 6d. a day, but they only got that amount for one month, for after a period—he thought that it was about twelve months—the pay was increased to five shillings. But that was not all they got. They were given accommodation, and they got houses.

Sometimes.

No ; excuse me. Since Union we have spent £25,000 on accommodation, and there is another £25,000 for the same purpose on this year’s Estimates.

Make it £125,000.

The great majority have houses. Never a word has been said about that. You would have thought these men got 5s. 6d. a day and nothing else.

They can’t possibly live on that.

Well, some people can’t live on £10,000 a year. But the Johannesburg press has said, morning, noon, and eve, that these men are only getting 5s. 6d. a day. The pay is increased by 6d. or so every two or three months. The vast majority are housed, and we intend to stop engaging any more white men for the railways unless we are able to provide further accommodation. We have established schools at Johannesburg, Germiston, and Pretoria, where the Dutch men are able to learn English, and vice versa. They get that free, and I am happy to say that a large number of the men are taking advantage of these schools. But we do not stop there. These men may get promotion and double and further increase their wages. A large number of these men have qualified for higher posts and been successful.

How many?

Several hundreds. I know the hon. member listens with considerable pain to the statement that these men are advancing in the service. Continuing, he said that they could get as many men as they required, and he was glad to say that they were a very good class of men. Now hon. members had said that this was not a living wage. Well, that was a question he would not go into at that juncture. It depended to a large extent on a man’s mode of life. If a man wanted to have a little gamble between the chains, and indulge in whippet racing, perhaps it would not be sufficient, but he thought that many white men in other parts of the world, if they had a house and 5s. a day, would think themselves very well off. He knew very well that he would give entire satisfaction to his hon. friends further down the House were he to say that if there was any railway surplus that it would be devoted to the purpose of increasing the wages of the men. He considered that artisans here were paid as well as any men in the world. In some parts they got 19s. 6d. a day. Many professional men, many a Scotch parson—good people as they were—and even some Dutch Reformed ministers did not get that amount per day. It was the old story. A man waxed fat, and then he kicked. The mechanic who worked on the railways in South Africa was not badly off. If he were left alone, he would be of the same opinion. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Sauer) was the very last man in the House to object to any section of the community being represented, and to say that the five hon. gentlemen should not represent the railway workers. Somebody said four and a half. (Laughter.)

Who is the “half.” (Laughter.)

said that his hon. friend the member for Jeppe had made one statement in regard to which he (Mr. Sauer) entirely differed from him. He said they must give the railway people an opportunity of sending one of their own number to Parliament, because they would be better represented. He (Mr. Sauer) hardly thought they could have a better representative than his hon. friend. He did not undergo those tremendous hardships that the ordinary rail representative. But, when it was suggested that they were influenced by the same considerations as other people, they resented it very much. The fact was they wanted a sort of exclusive privilege of free speech. (Laughter.) His hon. friend was very angry because, he said, he (Mr. Sauer) had said that they represented railway servant did. He was happily outside. They were fortunate in getting him as their way constituencies. The fact was they were to-day—they would forgive him for speaking plainly—more politicians than they were Labour representatives. They were elated by their recent success. He did not blame them. (Hear, hear.) They wanted to try and secure a better position for themselves in future. A good many people were trying to rival them in the hope that at the next election they would get their votes. But a Labour man was not going to vote for British people, even if they had titles. (Laughter.) He would vote for the man. He quite conceded to them that they wanted to keep abreast of the times. They were anxious to get to the forefront and they desired to improve their position. But they must not be over-sensitive when people said they were rather over-interested in the people on the railways. He had in his hands a little document. It was curious how these things came into one’s hands at the psychological moment. (Laughter.) The other day there was a meeting at Bloemfontein of the Trades and Labour Council. He must say that there were two railway people who spoke there, not that he was going to enforce this regulation and crucify them for it. They said “that the employment of white labour on the S.A.R. was commented upon, and a few of those present stated their views upon the matter, and pointed out that the employment of such labour was the best thing that could have happened as far as”—what? “As the Labour party was concerned”—(laughter)—not the interests of the labour man, but the Labour party. “The Administration, by adopting this policy, had played right into their hands, and if any member of the party neglected an opportunity of explaining to these poor whites that the only possible hope for them of receiving better treatment was by organisation and becoming members of the S.A. Labour party—" (Laughter.) “Of course,” remarked Mr. Sauer, “very good from a politician’s point of view, but it shows what you are after.” (Hear, hear.) “Other speakers expressed their opinion, and emphasised the fact that the men were already discontented, and only required a little propaganda work in various centres to make them members of some organisation and of the S.A. Labour party in particular. (Laughter.) By securing these men they would be in a position to elect their own representatives in the next Parliament.” (More laughter.) He (Mr. Sauer) merely quoted this to show that there was a good deal of human nature, even in the five men who represented the Labour party. He did not say it was all politics, because that would not be true. That was one side of the question. He had to look at the matter as a whole. His duty was to carry on the administration of the railways economically and efficiently, with due regard to the interests of the men employed there, and the only difference between his hon. friend who represented the Party of Five and himself was the extent of this provision. He could show that since the Act of Union—he was rather afraid to state the amount—there had been an increase of daily-paid employees at the rate of £264,886.

The same number of men?

Not the same number, but nearly the same. I don’t think there has been a single case where a man’s wage or salary has been decreased, but there have been considerable increases. Proceeding, Mr. Sauer said he did not want to say that there were no grievances, but he could not get over this fact, that there had never been a man yet that he knew of whose services had been dispensed with on the railway who had not been anxious to get back again. But if they had this propaganda of discontent they could get anybody to believe it. They could get him to believe it, if they persisted enough and told him that his salary was not enough. (Laughter.) If they persisted in it, they could get members of Parliament to believe that they were dreadfully underpaid. (Renewed laughter.) He had taken the trouble to compare the wages paid by the railways in this country with those paid in other countries, but he said this, allowing for the difference in conditions, there was not a single case where railwaymen, mechanics, daily-paid men—he was not talking of the three and fourpenny men, who were a small proportion—were paid more than they were here. In the great majority of cases the men here were paid more. In no case could they find that they were paid more in these other countries, so that in this country they were paying the high water mark price, in wages especially.

Eleven shillings a day for mechanics.

You cannot take out a single instance. I have the figures here for Canada, Australia, England, and elsewhere. After going through them all most carefully, I tell this House I cannot find one single instance where the men are better paid than they are in South Africa. Mr. Sauer went on to say that he had been told that he ought to let the people in Natal have the full political rights of men not employed in the public service. Well, the position was this, that the Cape and the C.S.A. railway people were in the same position as the rest of the public service, i.e., they could sign a requisition and talk as much treason as they chose over their meals and in their own homes, and every man could have his opinion as other men had and exercise his rights by voting when the occasion came, and facilities were given to the railwaymen, that was, they were carried 300, 400, or 500 miles free on the railways to record their votes.

Not at Georgetown.

Last time? You never asked. (Laughter.) I do not know what they did, or what was done. Proceeding, Mr. Sauer said they asked that the railway people should be put in a better position than the ordinary Civil Servant. The ordinary Civil Servant at the Cape—which in that respect was the premier Province—had not that right. The under-secretaries could not go on the platform ; neither could any Magistrate. Still, though they could not go on the platform and air altruistic views about their brother men, the railwaymen claimed that privilege.

What about Field-cornets?

They don’t get pensions. (Ministerial laughter.) They are not Civil Servants. Proceeding, he said that railway-men were now under the rule applied in the case of Civil Servants throughout the Union. A man had the right to vote, but he could not play the part of an electioneering agent and go on to the platform.

Why not?

replied that in the first place if the right was given to railway people then it must be given to all Civil Servants Moreover, the great majority of Civil Servants had expressed a very strong opinion that they did not want this privilege. There were even people in the railways who did not wish to join the Society of Amalgamated Engineers, to which the hon. member for Georgetown had referred. There were many of them. A great deal of pressure had been put upon them ; it was not quite so free as hon. members might suppose. His hon. friend wanted rights for a majority when he was in a minority. Very strong pressure had been brought to bear on these people.

Oh, no.

My friends are so busy making speeches about the railways that they do not know what goes on on the railways. (Laughter.) These men, he repeated, were told that unless they joined the Amalgamated Society of Engineers they would lose their billets, be ostracised, or not get promotion.

Who was told that?

Who! I know what will happen if I tell you who. He won’t be the first man they will have tried to hound out of the railway service. As far as most railway employees were concerned they were satisfied so long as they had the right to vote and to send people to Parliament. There was a good deal of human nature in that. They saw what happened in America. There, with a change of administration, the whole Civil Service was turned out. Why? Because they maintained that they could not carry on the Government with people in the service who were hostile to them. (Ministerial cheers.) There was not only human nature but a great deal of common sense in that. In the interests of the Civil Servants and in the interests of the railway people he would regret very much if a concession of that kind were given, and they would have to pass a good many resolutions before they would get him to assent to what in this particular would be detrimental to the public interest and to the public servants. He was going to support—and he hoped that the hon. member for Port Elizabeth would bear the shock—the proposal of the hon. member for Uitenhage. He did not suppose that the hon. member was hopeful of passing the motion. He would ask the House to consider the effect of such a motion being put on the paper while a Commission was inquiring into railway matters. The Commission was representative ; it had been said that he had appointed his accusers to sit in judgment over him! Should they anticipate that Commission’s report? It was not his fault that the Commission had been sitting for a long time. In the middle of last session he was asked to appoint a Commission which he was told could complete its labours by the end of the session, so little did the critics know of the matter. The Commission had inquired into a great many cases, trivial and otherwise. Some of them were very important, for instance, the trip system. Hon. members had referred to the system of separate allowances in this connection, and certainly when the report came up it would receive full and fair consideration. He understood that that report would be ready next month. Were they to stultify the proceedings of the Commission, and stultify themselves by accepting a motion which his hon. friend had brought forward in not the calmest of moments. He should have seen that he would have served the interests of the railway men better by awaiting the report. The question of grievances would receive his full, fair, and sympathetic consideration. (Ministerial cheers.)

rose to reply.

It will be very unusual if the hon. member speaks now.

said he regretted that he had not noticed the hon. member rise.

then began to address the House.

You are doing an unusual thing in speaking now.

maintained that he was not taking an unusual course. The hon. Minister was certainly introducing a new principle, one that he had not heard enunciated in that House before. If the Minister had followed the usual constitutional course—which unfortunately the members of the Government seemed to avoid on every possible occasion—he would not have waited to see what was the consensus of opinion in the House before rising to express an opinion. He had always been under the impression that under Constitutional Government the House expected a lead from Ministers. Proceeding, Sir Thomas said that it would have given the House a great deal more pleasure if, instead of voting for an increase of his own salary, he had taken a penitent attitude and voted for a diminution of it. He regretted that there should be any suggestion that hon. members on both sides of the House who did not belong to the party represented on the cross-benches were not prepared to do justice to a large number of employees. Such an attitude was calculated to produce incalculable harm to the legitimate interests of railway employees. There was no doubt that many hon. members were placed in a difficult position over this matter, because no one could deny that there was discontent among the men. Should that discontent ever reach the stage suggested by the hon. member for Georgetown, it would not alone be detrimental to the interests of the country but also to the men themselves. (Cheers.) As one who had had some connection with railway administration, he would say that any move in the direction indicated, although the men might obtain a temporary advantage by suspending the business of the country, would do incalculable damage to the interests of the men themselves and to their wives and families. Large numbers of these men were on the fixed establishment, and were entitled to pensions. There was no doubt that there was a considerable amount of discontent in the service, and there were certain legitimate grievances which demanded redress. (Hear, hear.) But, in the interests of the men, he hoped the mover would not press his motion to a division. The matter should stand over until the Grievances Commission had reported, so that the House could see whether the Commission proposed to redress the grievances complained of. When Union came into force, there were great differences in the rating and scale of pay of the men employed by the various railway systems, and he acknowledged that the Commissioner was exceedingly tardy in appointing the Commission. But they were not going to improve the condition of the railway service by heated political discussions in that House. They might make party capital out of it, but the people who were bound to suffer were the railway employees. It was impossible in a large railway service not to have a certain amount of arbitrary treatment, and when he presided over the interests of the Cape railways, he recognised that every employee, if he considered that he was unjustifiably treated, should have the right of direct appeal to the Minister in charge of the department, and that he should not be subjected to the whims and idiosyncrasies of any individual temporarily placed over him. However, the mover should wait until two Railway Commissions had reported, and if those reports were found to be unsatisfactory, then would be the time to bring forward such a motion as that before the House. The Opposition was entirely in sympathy with doing everything possible to do away with discontent in the railway service, but he appealed to his hon. friend to withdraw the motion, although if it were pressed, he would be compelled to vote for it.

said he considered the introduction of the motion was ill-timed. He was constrained to intervene in the debate with the remarks of the Minister of Railways and Harbours with regard to circular No. 7 as applied to Natal. If it were compulsory that all the men on the Union railways should be placed on an equality, then all the privileges enjoyed by the Cape men should have been extended to the Natal men, but that had not been done.

moved the adjournment of the debate until tomorrow.

Agreed to.