Several points of the measure have been criticised, points which are outside the scheme, and which I will deal with in a preliminary sort of way before I come to discuss the details of the Bill. A number of criticisms have been made. One criticism that has been stated over and over again in the press is that the Bill gives too little information. They have said that the Bill is not sufficiently detailed, and too much is left for filling in later on by the reprehensible method of regulations, and, therefore, the Bill does not lay down the fundamental principles which should obtain in a measure of this kind. Now, sir, I would say—and I have studied many Defence Bills in the course of the inquiries which I have made—-that I do not think there is a Defence Bill existing anywhere which is so full of detail as this Bill. On some points it is possible that there will be room for detail, but I think that the House will supply what is needed before the Bill finally emerges from the consideration of this House. Hon. members, who take the trouble to study the Defence Bills of other countries, will find that there was far more detail in this measure that any law of the kind anywhere. There is a great deal of detail in a Bill of this kind that has to be left to be dealt with by regulations. There are things that cannot be fixed definitely in a law, because things may happen in the future that will alter the state of affairs most considerably, and to fix the needs of the country in a stereotyped fashion will lead to a most impossible position. At any rate, the House will understand that an enormous amount of detail must be left to regulations, and hon. members who have studied the question and are cognisant with military affairs will know that in other countries a similar state of affairs exists. You have, as a rule, a very small Defence Bill, and then you have codes and regulations working out the details of the scheme in all its bearings. Hon. members will understand when I say that these regulations must come before the House, not perhaps for approval, but for information, and that though they will then be in force, it will be competent for any hon. member to move the deletion of a regulation or an amendment, or to move in some other direction. That is one of the objections that have been raised against the Bill. Another objection, which I have seen remarked upon very widely in the press of the country, is this. People forget that this is purely a Defence Bill. As I said last year, I did not think it was possible to ask Parliament to pass any law other than one simply for the future defence of South Africa, and hon. members will see that what I said on that occasion has been carried out in the measure.

The first clause of the Bill says that every citizen shall be liable, between certain years of age, to render, in time of war, personal service in defence of the Union or any part of South Africa, whether within or outside the Union. So, sir, you will see that this scheme is purely and simply one of South African defence, and its merits must be recognised on this basis. No attempt has been made in this Bill to go further than the question of South African defence. The wisdom of the course that I have adopted is illustrated by the criticisms that have been levelled against this Bill, and which all arise from misunderstanding. The impression has got abroad that any person who is trained under this scheme is liable in time of war to be sent to other parts of the world in defence of the British Empire. However laudable such a course might be, and on that I will not express an opinion, the Bill does not deal with that point at all. It is for the defence of South Africa, and a citizen who is trained under this measure is simply trained to serve inside South Africa, but not necessarily within the boundaries of the Union. There are certain gaps that still remain in the Union map of South Africa. There are large tracts of country which do not belong to the Union. You have the three native territories, you have Bechuanaland, Basutoland, and Swaziland, which, in the Constitution, are reserved from the Union of South Africa, and are still under Imperial control. You have Portuguese territory on one side and German territory on the other. These are territories which are all within South Africa and yet outside the borders of the Union. It would be a mad policy for us to pass a law which would mean that an army of South Africa would be broken up once it passed the borders of the Union. People who are trained under this Bill will be required to defend the Union and go outside its borders if necessary, but in no case will a person who is trained under this Bill be required to go further than the border of South Africa. It must be accepted on that basis and criticised from that point of view. I do not think in any case that it would be wise to legislate any further than the Bill goes at the present time. I think we must leave it to the wisdom and the good sense of the people of South Africa in the future when the British Empire, of which we form a part, is in need of assistance.

And I have seen both on the platform and in other places criticisms to this effect, that we should have made the Bill more ample, and should have provided also for a larger recognition of our obligations towards the Imperial Navy in the framing of this Bill. Well, that matter I have left alone; but hon. members will see the task which has been assumed in this Bill is large enough ; and if in our day or generation we pass this Bill and we set into successful operation in all its great magnitude a machinery of this kind, I think we shall be rendering an enormous service not only to the British Army, but to the British Empire and the Imperial Navy. There is no doubt about it that once when this South African Army has been trained and is efficient and can be relied on for all the contingencies that may arise, a great burden will be raised from the shoulders of the British taxpayers, and we shall be helping the Empire by putting forward an efficient scheme such as is now before the House. Another point of criticism has been raised on this Bill, which I am sure arose from a misunderstanding. There seems to be an impression abroad in various parts of the country that the training referred to in this Bill will be a full course of four years; that young men between the age of 17 and 21 years will be taken from their homes and transported to some town or other where they will be placed in barracks and trained there for a period of four years, and thereafter become full-fledged soldiers. People have come to me and said we are making enormous demands on them. First, we take their children from them and send them to school for a number of years, and after that we take them again and put them into barracks, to be made into soldiers, and that we are ruining their children and their prospects. Well, hon. members will see that no such scheme has been adopted here. It would be the maddest policy in any country to impose on the youth of the country a four years’ continuous training. It is not even done in Germany. There a youth is taken for two years, and so it is in France, and these are the two biggest armies in Europe. Hon. members will see in a later clause in this Bill that it is carefully laid down that, although the training is to last for four years, the number of candidates and the days of training will be laid down by regulation. I can assure those who are under this lamentable misapprehension that no such demands will be made on the youth of this country. I think we may lay down in this Bill, to remove the misapprehension, that the training shall not be beyond a certain period in each year. I shall discuss these periods later on.

There is one other general objection which I have seen to this Bill, and to which I may just as well refer to now. I have seen it stated in some quarters that some coloured citizens feel offended with this Bill, because they are excluded in a matter so important for South African citizenship as defence. Things have been said on the platform, and, I think, things are being said privately, about this provision that no compulsion regarding military training will be laid on coloured citizens. My answer to that objection is very simple. There has not been the least intention of hurting the feelings of anyone in South Africa, and hon. members will see that all this clause 7 provides is simply that no compulsion shall be laid on any coloured citizen to serve or train in any military capacity, unless Parliament has otherwise decided. But no provision was laid down by which coloured citizens may not volunteer and offer their services to the country, and a proposition like this will always be considered by the Government. (Hear, hear.) But here in the Bill we can only take the line that no compulsion is laid on them. If we had done that we would have had to change the entire scope of the Bill. Hon. members will see that compulsory training is not to be laid on all the white people of this country. That being so, I think this objection which has been raised in certain quarters ought not to weigh with the House. After these few preliminary remarks, I think it would be advisable to deal in more detail with the essential principles of this Bill. After that I shall explain to the House how it is proposed to start the actual working of this scheme; after that I hope to attend to a few general considerations and also point out the essential bearings of the scheme. When hon. members come to the scheme itself they will find that it looks very complex and also intricate. People find it so complicated that they fail to understand the conditions of it. Hon. members will see that the complexity of a measure of this kind rises from the many-sided considerations that have to be dealt with. All those problems had to be solved, and in consequence the machinery is here arranged, and forces are here brought into existence which seem multiplex and manifold, but which are necessitated by conditions. Hon. members will see there is a general division for classification of the various branches of the defence force which it is proposed to establish. First there will be the permanent force, then the Coast Garrison force. There is the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserves, and there are all the various reserves connected with these forces, and in addition there are two or three subsidiaries, which are really not part of the defence forces, but subsidiaries, such as the Cadets and the Rifle Associations; so that you have here five different organisations within the defence forces and two subsidiaries to the defence forces. And, sir, I think it will be best for me to deal with these various branches of the defence force which are dealt with in the Bill. Coming first to the permanent force, the problem that had to be solved there was this: the people of South Africa do not want a standing army. We don’t think that scheme is necessary or that it would be justified on financial grounds, and therefore hon. members will see that the whole scheme is simply that of a citizen army, more or less, of the Swiss type; and here in South Africa if once you take to a purely citizen army other problems arise again and it is recognised by all men, who have thought on the subject and have had experience, that it is not safe to rely purely and solely on a citizen army, and you require a force—a small striking force—which will take the field without loss of time or without delay, in emergencies—such emergencies as we have had in South Africa in the past and such as we may have in future again.

That consideration, therefore, takes you beyond a purely citizen force; and you require in this country a small permanent striking force to deal with emergencies which arise suddenly, and which you may nip in the bud, and which if you do, will save a huge expenditure afterwards. Then another question arises—with regard to the technical services, especially the artillery branch of the army—and no doubt you may have a very efficient Volunteer artillery. We have some regiments of artillery now in South Africa of a Volunteer character that are very efficient—(hear, hear)—but the tendency is, as a rule, for Volunteer artillery not to reach the highest standard. I am told that it is the universal experience, even in the United Kingdom, sir, I have been told, that the Territorial artillery is not up to the mark it should be, and they have a fairly efficient training, and there seemed good reason to expect that they would attain a high standard. I think it would be unsafe—and I think hon. members will agree with me—to rely entirely on a Volunteer artillery for the requirements of the Union ; and if you can solve on an economic basis the question of a permanent striking force, you also solve at the same time the question of a permanent artillery. In South Africa we have had a system of a permanent artillery force in the Transvaal Republic—and a very good and efficient force it was—(hear, hear)—and it rendered most excellent and brilliant services during the late war. There was also such a force in the Orange Free State, which also rendered very efficient services during the late war. Well, we may follow the precedent, and have an artillery force maintained specially as such, and paid as such, and therefore of the highest standard and efficiency, but hon. members will recognise that such a force will be a very expensive one—(hear, hear)—and if we could find a solution which would give this country a permanent artillery striking force without any undue expenditure, that would be a case to be put before us; and in the provision made in this matter in the Bill hon. members will, I think, find a solution that is workable and that will not, at the same time, incur too much expense. We have a precedent in the old Cape Colony. The C.M.R. is a police force primarily, and most of its duties are police duties, but it is also intended to be a striking force in time of need in the Native Territories, and has a battery of artillery attached to it to provide artillery training for some of its members. There you have the cheapest and best solution of the problem. You have a police force which is paid as a police force, which is organised on a military basis, and a number of its members are trained as artillerists, and form a very efficient body of artillery. Well, sir, that is the precedent which has been followed in this Bill in preference to the precedent which has been the case in the old Transvaal and Free State Republics; and what is proposed in this Bill with regard to this permanent force is that we should take a part of the South African Police Force, and that part which is not so much engaged with police duties—not engaged with the purely criminal work of the highest specialised character. It is proposed to take 2,0 of the rural police and organise them on the C.M.R. principle, and let these mounted rifles form the striking force, and strengthen the force of each of these regiments with a battery of artillery, so that, besides the advantages of a striking force, you will also have the advantages of a permanent artillery in connection with this scheme. I think, sir, that this is, as I have stated the solution which is cheapest, and I think the results are going to be very advantageous. I have heard it stated in criticism of this scheme, that there will be a danger that this part of the police force, which is organised as the South African Mounted Rifles into regiments of a semi-military basis, will tend in future to look upon themselves more or less as soldiers, will neglect their police duties, and in consequence the police work of the country will be less efficiently performed where this branch of the police is stationed. I do not believe for a moment, sir, that this is going to be the case, because I do not think that the organisation of part of our police force into a permanent force, as I have described, will alter the essential character of this police force. In fact, in the Transvaal and the Free State even to-day our police forces in the rural districts are still organised almost entirely on the old constabulary basis, which was exactly the same idea in the Transvaal as the C.M.R. in the Cape; and here in the Cape we have also the C.M.P., which is a police force which has really much of the same character ; and no great change will be effected if that corps were organised on a semi-military basis, and made more or less of the type of the C.M.R. That is the solution which is proposed here, and we shall have a striking force in South Africa of about 2,000 men, part of which will be mounted troops, and part of which will be artillery ; and in case of any difficulty it will be possible to concentrate themselves from the parts where they are stationed to where they are needed, and put them against any foe or against any disturbers of the peace within our territories. Hon. members will see that it is possible to put a number of each regiment through an efficient artillery training. Thereafter another portion of the regiment may be taken and placed amongst the artillerists, so that nominally we should have in the permanent force five batteries of artillery, but we should be able to man a larger number. We should have a highly-trained artillery force which could man a number of batteries far beyond the five which we propose to start with. (Hear, hear.) We do not exclude from this scheme the volunteer artillery, and it is our idea to start in South Africa with at least five batteries of volunteer artillery, our citizen force. But I think, sir, when once you have your permanent batteries in connection with your S.A.M.R., you can make your citizen batteries much more efficient by using them in conjunction with the permanent batteries. The result of this scheme would be that, not only would you have a number of permanent batteries of the highest efficiency, but your ordinary citizen batteries would also have a high standard to work up to, and probably attain a degree of efficiency which they would not otherwise attain to.

Hon. members will see that if this scheme is carried out we shall have to provide for certain reserves for the permanent force. I think one of the weaknesses of the C.M.R. scheme of the Cape is that the reserve has never been sufficient, and if the C.M.R. force were withdrawn from their district for military purposes and from their police duties a very serious state of affairs may arise from the police point of view. In connection, therefore, with our permanent force it is proposed to create two kinds of reserves. We have first the police reserve, which will take the place of the S.A.M.R. as they are removed in time of emergency from their district and which can take their place at once as they are removed to the centre of operations. The result will be that in a district where there is a regiment of the S.A.M.R. we should also have an ordinary police reserve. These men would be trained to some extent, and they would know their duties fairly well, so that in case the regiment is withdrawn for active military operations there is at once a police force in that district to take their place. Another reserve is to be created to fill the gaps in the S.A.M.R. No doubt if they go to war gaps would be created in their ranks, and you do not want, after some operations, to find that your brave S.A.M.R. have disappeared ; a field reserve will therefore be created. I think, beyond the advantages I have mentioned already in connection with the permanent force, there is this further great advantage, that our citizen force will have a force of high efficiency to work up to. It will not be always the case that we shall have the regular forces stationed in this country. The day will come—and we shall have to prepare for that day—when there will be no more regular troops stationed in this country any more than there are stationed in Canada to-day. I think it would be a matter of the greatest importance to South Africa to have a very efficient permanent force which will be a standard of comparison for the citizen force of this country. (Hear, hear.) I think it would help very much to the citizen force attaining a due degree of efficiency. This scheme will, no doubt, involve a considerable amount of expenditure, but I do not think that it will impose an undue strain upon the resources of this country.

Now I come to two other forces which will be created, and more in connection with the coast defence of South Africa. It is proposed to have here a coast garrison force which will be utilised for the defence of certain important points along the coast of South Africa and also what is called here a Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve. In regard to the coast garrison force, the position is this: There are certain points along the coast of South Africa which, as I explained last year to the House, we have to fortify and to hold to the uttermost. The Cape Peninsula is one ; Durban is the other. There is no other point along the coast which, as things stand at present, requires any fortification. In regard to these two important points, we have to fortify them, we have to establish fixed defences, and in connection with the fixed defences we require a force such as the coast garrison force, which is to be established under this Bill. Now hon. members in Cape Town are familiar with the system which is in existence here now. Here in the Cape Peninsula you have this state of affairs today. You have the Royal Garrison Artillery, who are, in the first instance, responsible for the fixed defences of Simon’s Town and of Table Bay. Besides and beyond that, you have a Colonial force, the Cape Garrison Artillery, who are trained in conjunction with that force, and are intended in time of war to operate in conjunction with the Royal Garrison Artillery. The system up to now has worked very well. (Hear, hear.) I am told—from personal inspection I can say it myself, too—that the Cape Garrison Artillery is a fairly efficient force, not, of course, up to the standard of the Royal Garrison Artillery—that you would not expect—but the conjunction of the two forces has had the best effect upon the Cape Garrison Artillery, because they have had a high standard to work up to. Under this Bill the question may arise, what change is to be made here in the Peninsula? Now, to begin with, no change whatever is to be made. In clauses 13, 14, and 15 a number of alterations are laid down.

I believe that it is the wish of the Imperial Government that for the present, at any rate, we should not disturb the working of the present system. I entirely agree with that wish. For us to get into efficient working, this great machine will take time and an enormous amount of trouble and expense, and for us simultaneously to deal with coast defences on a different basis would lead to dislocation. Therefore, for the present, the scheme will remain as it is to-day, namely, the fixed defences of the Peninsula will continue to be looked after by the Royal Garrison Artillery and the South African Garrison Artillery, working in conjunction. In future, it is possible we may have to go further, and therefore hon. members will find other ideas also embodied in the Bill. The day may come when the British Government will change its mind, and say, “We cannot lend you any Garrison Artillery for your coast defence, and you must provide for the whole of the services yourself.” Then two courses will be open to us. We may either say to the British Government: “You lent us certain units of Royal Garrison Artillery, for which we will nay, and they will be a stiffening to the South African Garrison Artillery.” or we may go a step further, and the day may come when we may have entirely to rely on our own resources. It may also be that this system of borrowing from the British Army will not be feasible, and that difficulties in the matter of discipline and so on may arise through having two different forces. We may have to rely entirely on our own resources, and to have a special force for coast defence, and that is provided for in the Bill. A series of progressive stages is laid down in the Bill. We will start with the present system, and finally may take over the control of the coast defences. The wish of the British Government is that things should remain on the existing basis, and that wish we shall entirely respect. This force is of a somewhat different character to the citizen army. In the latter you take your men at a certain age and train them, but in the case of the Coast Garrison Artillery you want older men, with more technical experience, such as we have in the Cape Garrison Artillery, and men who will remain a long time in the service. We should have to create a similar force at Durban to the one in Cape Town, and I think we shall be able to establish at Durban a force which will be no less efficient than the one in Cape Town. Whether it will be necessary in that case to also have a unit of the Royal Garrison Artillery will be a question for the experts.

Another force under this Bill and also connected with coast defences is the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve. That force has been put on a different footing, for although coming from South Africa, it will be placed entirely at the disposal of the British Navy. (Hear, hear.) There are British Statutes dealing with this matter. In this Bill we give our adhesion to the scheme, and say one or more corps may be created which will be trained, not by us, but in conjunction with the Navy. We put these men entirely at the disposal of the British Government, and in the time of need they would be at the beck and call of the Royal Navy, or its branch stationed here. (Cheers.) This exists in an attenuated form at the present time. Last year we asked the Admiralty to conduct an inspection of the Royal Na val Volunteer Reserve, and that proved entirely satisfactory. I had been inclined to smile at this force, but the flag officer who conducted the inspection said it was of much greater utility than I had imagined. I hope it will be possible to have such a force here, for, as some people prefer water, let them have their chance there.

I now come to the most important part of the scheme—that is, the Citizen Army. The scheme laid down in the Bill has given rise to a great deal of discussion. We are here face to face with fundamental principles. The first question that arises is: “Are you going to train your whole population?” Setting aside the idea of a standing army, and adopting the idea of a citizen army, are you going to train all your available population? If not, what principles are you going to adopt in selecting the number that you want to train, and what machinery are you going to create for training them? The first question is: “Are we going to train our whole population?” In theory, that is the Swiss system. In Switzerland every able-bodied citizen from 20 to 32 years of age has to undergo a certain amount of military training per annum. Men are only exempt on certain grounds, the chief ground being medical unfitness. Now, sir, in Switzerland the medical examination seems to solve the whole problem which we have to deal with in this country, because statistics show that in Switzerland 42 per cent, of the available male population fail to pass the medical test, and therefore almost half of the Swiss population are set aside at once by the doctor, and the other half is taken for military training from 20 to 32. Hon. members will understand that some such problematic machinery we cannot have in South Africa, because I don’t know whether the Swiss people are of such poor stamina, but at any rate, if we were to have simply a test of medical fitness of the youth of South Africa I think a far larger proportion would pass the medical test than in Switzerland. (Cheers.) I remember some years ago we held a medical inspection in the schools in the Transvaal, and doctors went through all the schools because there was strong pressure in the Transvaal to see what the state of health of the children was, and I was astonished. The report has been published, and was laid on the table last year. I don’t know whether hon. members were interested in it, but to me the astonishing feature was the extreme healthiness of our children, at any rate in the Transvaal. It was quite an exceptional thing to find anything up with a child, and if there was anything it was merely the teeth or perhaps the eyes, but not a very serious matter, and if we are to apply the medical test to our population most of them would have to go to military service. The point, as I say, is, are we going to compel everybody? And I know there is a feeling amongst certain members of this House to which no doubt expression will be given, that also all over South Africa the best and clearest solution of this question is to train everybody, to train every available young man of a certain age. (Cheers.) If you do that no question of favouritism arises and no difficulties in regard to selection, and the result is, of course, that you will have a far larger army in time of need than you would otherwise have.

Well, hon. members will see that that suggestion has not been adopted in the Bill and for various reasons, not because I am opposed to a more efficient scheme! than has been laid down in this Bill, but for what seemed to me very cogent reasons, which I wish to state to this House, and which I hope the House will consider very carefully before finally making up their minds on this question. In the first place, to compel everyone in South Africa to serve for a certain period in the year, in the town and in the country, and all over South Africa, is going to put a very severe demand on South Africa—a very severe demand! In the second place you are going to create a much bigger army than you will ever require for the requirements of South Africa. (An HON. MEMBER: “Question.”) Yes, that is a question, but it is a point we should have to consider very carefully, and I am urging the points of view in favour of this middle course which I have adopted in this Bill. You will get a far larger army than you will require for a long time to come, anyhow, here in South Africa, and not only will it be too large, but it will be an enormous expense to train the whole male population in South Africa. Because you will be doing that. You will not be training half the male population, as happens in Switzerland, and I propose to train half the population. But you will train the whole population, and the result will be an enormous burden of expense, and I am afraid that the result will not be the creation of an efficient machine. I would far rather have a smaller number of men. I would far rather halve my army and have efficient men than have an enormous army which includes inefficients as well as efficients. (Cheers.) We have to recognise that, and those who have some practical military experience will bear me out, that in a population you have a large number of people who, however good they may be, are not good soldiers. We had the experience in the late war, that men who were great patriots, and even great politicians, were no good—(laughter)—no good at all in actual operations. I think if we force every citizen, whether he is a scholar, or whether he is a politician, or whether he is a man of peace, if we force every citizen to become a man of war we shall not get an efficient army. Therefore, we ought fairly to consider whether it is not possible to devise a scheme which will naturally weed out these inefficients, these people who are unwarlike, these people who prefer peace and peaceful ways, and that is the middle course that has been adopted in this Bill. We have to argue this question out here. I am prepared to accept either scheme. I am sure that the middle course in this Bill is the one which will be more acceptable to the people, and will, in the end, give the best results. I will show how the matter will operate in regard to numbers. According to the census figures, we should have an annual increment in our male population at the available age of seventeen, of about 12,000 young men, and after some medical examination, I suppose we would train about 10,000 each year, and, therefore, if you take a four years’ training course, as proposed in the Bill, you will have an active army under training at any particular time of 40,000 men. Ten thousand will come out each year, and there will be 10,000 reserves at the other end, and in the end you will have an army of 40,000. What I propose in this scheme, which I explained to the House last year, and also in a pamphlet on the Bill, is this: I think that number is too large. Twenty-four thousand seems to me a large enough force to have under training at any particular time. That will require 6,000 men to come in each year; half of the 12,000 annual increment of the population. Therefore, after four years you will have 24,000 men under training. As they are trained they will pass into the reserve, and others will take their place, and the result will be not only 24,000 men under training at any particular time, but you will build up a reserve which will be a most valuable part of your defence organisation. If I had any idea that the medical test would work here as in Switzerland, I would not adopt this principle, but I am sure it will not work that way, in view of our fine climate and healthy conditions generally. Therefore, you must have some other scheme if you want to select half of your population. What is the scheme in the Bill? This scheme is intended to raise the least amount of friction, and to enlist as far as possible the active military interests and sympathies which exist among the people. We say, in the first place, to young South Africa: Come forward voluntarily. That, in itself, will bring forward all the strenuous men who take an interest in military matters. All the future would-be soldiers will come in at that stage and say, We like the idea, and would like to be trained.

Of course, there is a number who wilt stand out, and I will show how these people will be dealt with under the scheme. In the first place, we will have the voluntary section of people who will come forward of their own free will. In the background of the voluntary system you have a certain amount of compulsion, and the scheme proposed in the latter connection is this: From time to time the Governor-General will determine the number of men that are needed for the requirements of South Africa. People between certain ages will then be asked to volunteer, and if a sufficient number is not forthcoming, then the Governor-General will state the number of men that are required to be selected for service. The ballot will then be put in force all over the country, and the result will be that the number of men who do not come forward: voluntarily will be picked by ballot. Hon. members will see that the ballot system is explained with some detail in the Bill, and is arranged in such a way as to cause the least dislocation to the ordinary avocations of the country. We propose, as hon. members will see from the Bill, to divide South Africa into districts, and put a permanent officer in charge of each district. Part of the duties of that permanent officer will he to register the youths of available age in each district in his area, and he will have to register them in three classes. First there will be those who may be called upon to serve with least dislocation to their avocations in the country. In the second class will be put those who will serve with less dislocation, and in the third class will be put those who will serve at greater risk and sacrifice than any of the members of the other two classes. That list will be made up by the permanent officers, who will be assisted in this regard by the police in these areas. Then there will be a revising court, which will consist of the magistrate of the district, certain officers and prominent citizens, and they will go through the lists. If any man has an objection to being placed in a certain class then he could make out a case for being transferred to another class. The result will be that after the registration, in the course of which due care will be exercised, and after the revision of the registration it will be possible by ballot to choose from the first, from the second, and then from the third of these classes. Whether any hon. member is able to suggest a better system of dealing with this intricate question I do not know. It is a question upon which I have an open mind, because there is no principle at stake. It is really a question that concerns the machinery of the scheme. It seems to me that this voluntary principle on the one side and the compulsory principle on the other will give the best results from the point of getting the required number of the population to serve in the defence scheme of South Africa.

And, of course, there is a stimulus provided in this Bill in order to make these people bud forth more voluntarily. I refer to the capitation tax. I am told that this is the most unpopular part of the whole scheme. It is said that this tax, though it makes for efficient service, is the most unpopular part of the whole scheme. I have heard it said in some quarters that it is not enough, and in other quarters the feeling is that it is too much. I am told again that it is not a sufficient inducement. It may be possible that hon. members of this House will bring forward suggestions that will make this part of the scheme more efficient. This idea I have taken from the Swiss scheme, although the system works somewhat differently in that country, and it is fixed according to the wealth of the person concerned. The rich man pays much more than the poor man. Of course, hon. members will understand that it would not be possible to run such a system here, but when we have an income tax then it may be possible. Hon. members will see that the objections to the tax are varied—on the one hand it is claimed that is not sufficient, and on the other hand there are people who say that it should not be imposed at all. I hope that hon. members will give this part of the scheme their most earnest and careful consideration. I am sure that this tax, though it is not very high, will help materially to make people come forward voluntarily and so enable us to dispense with rather intricate machinery. These young men will have two alternatives. Either they can enter the citizen force and be trained for four years, or they pay the £1 a year for 24 years I think that it will be sufficient inducement to these young men to be patriotic and serve in the citizen force instead of paying the tax for a period of 24 years I hope that hon. members will remember that this part of the scheme has been adopted from the Swiss system, and consider it on its merits. I am very much afraid that if we were to drop this part of the proposals—the tax in lieu of service—the voluntary part of the scheme would break down, and that we should have to apply the ballot, which would not be a popular system. Rather than have too much of the ballot I think we ought to go forward with the capitation tax. I am in favour of the voluntary principle, but if this is to be maintained then we must retain that portion of the scheme which deals with contributions. I hope that in spite of the fact that this is unpopular hon. members will think twice before they do away with it. Now, sir, having dealt with the details of the Bill, I will come to a point that is of some importance, and that is the question of training—the amount of training these young men will have to undergo. Hon. members will see from clause 61 of the measure it is provided that we shall deal with this question by means of regulations, and I think this is the only way of dealing with the subject, though, of course, it is possible to fix a maximum which would perhaps reassure people.

But the amount of training that will have to be undergone is a question that will have to have a good deal of consideration. What is the training in other countries? I have here the amount of training in a number of cases. Take the Territorial Army in England, which is, of course, something like the one we have here. In the Territorial Army they start with a preliminary training—really a recruit training—and that requires a certain amount of separate drills to be carried out, and also a camp, which lasts from eight to eighteen days, according to circumstances. In one year they have a camp which lasts from one week to two weeks or a little over—from eight to fifteen or eighteen days, as the case may be, for the various branches of the Army; and beyond that they have a number of separate drills. That is for raw men. After that a man undergoes also a certain amount of training per annum. They are brought together in a camp which is held for from eight to eighteen days, and they have a few separate drills, which are mostly for musketry instruction, and so on. This is the system they have in England. The Swiss system is a good deal severer. In Switzerland the system is as follows: there a man starts as a recruit in his twentieth year, and the recruits’ training is fairly severe. It is not a couple of weeks with a few drills, as they have in England, but is a course which lasts for from two to three months, according to the arms. If you are in the cavalry, you must train for three months ; in the infantry, you train for 65 days ; and in the artillery, you train for two and a half months. That is the recruits’ course. Then, after that, from his 21st year to his 32nd year, a man has to undergo a certain number of annual courses, which in all cases amount to eleven days per annum. After a recruit has trained in his 20th year, he goes up for seven or eight years for eleven days to a camp, and after that he is efficient, although he still remains in the army up to the age of 32. After that age, he undergoes no further drill. At the age of 32 he passes out of that active stage, and he gets into the second line, and there he simply goes through one camp. That lasts from the age of 32 to the age of 40. He does not go up for annual camp, as he did in the earlier stages, but to one camp. So that hon. members will see that the Swiss system imposes a heavier recruits’ course.

In Australia the system is different again. In Australia they have no recruits’ drill for the simple reason that the scheme adopted there provides for a very efficient cadet training. A boy starts there at the age of 12, and until he is 14 he is a compulsory cadet. In Switzerland they do not have a cadet training. All the boys learn in school is gymnastics. When he gets fairly old enough he can join a rifle club and learn to shoot and so on. They do not have the cadet system in Switzerland. (Ministerial “Hear, hears.”) In Australia there is no recruits’ training, because a boy starts as a junior cadet from the age of 12 to 14, and after attaining the age of 14 he becomes a senior cadet ; and then from 18 he goes into the defence force. These years of cadet training give him quite an efficient recruits’ training, and the result is in Australia there is no recruits’ training. And the young Australian citizen in the defence force must every year go through a course of sixteen days, eight days in camp and eight days out of camp. And that goes on for seven years after he has passed his efficiency test. That system—it is somewhat like that which is enforced in Canada, but it is slightly different from the Australian, which was recommended by Lord Kitchener and was very much like they had in New Zealand and Canada. Here in South Africa what we propose is this: we are going to have a system of cadets, which, to some extent, is compulsory, and I say this, I adopt here the centralisation suggestion. I say that if a man has passed an efficient cadet training he should not be subjected to a recruit’s training ; but if a man has not passed as an efficient cadet then he needs to take a recruit’s training. I think if a young boy you can make a fairly efficient young fellow from a military point of view by a cadet training. I think the utmost we will require of a man in the four years he is in the active citizen force is a couple of weeks’ training each year. Of course, hon. members will understand that the scheme varies somewhat for the different branches of the force. A man being trained as an artilleryman will have to do much more training: three weeks. For a mounted man, I think a fortnight is enough, and for a man on foot, a camp of eight days altogether, with another week for separate training, is sufficient. So that hon. members will see that the demands we intend to make on a young South African citizen are by no means excessive. (Hear, hear.) Our annual training will be somewhat longer than the Swiss training, but the recruit’s course will not be so long. For the first year, while he is being trained, I do not think that more than a month’s service need be asked for. For the four years, he is not being trained more than three weeks, and that will be all required of our young men ; and I feel that I am certain I must be mistaken with the temper of our people—both the English-speaking and the Dutch-speaking sections—if they do not willingly accept that amount of service. (Opposition cheers.) An enormous amount of newspaper writing has arisen more or less on a mistaken idea, which may be due to bad drafting, that the period of service will be four years. The period of service will be four years, but it will be so many weeks of service per year for four years. After these four years, men will be passed into the reserve —after their first training has finished—but a man will remain in the defence organisation, and in case of need it is not only the 24,000 men under active training we have to fall back upon, but 5,000 or 6,000 more every year, who will also be called up for service. Provision is also made in this Bill to call up these reserves from time to time for inspection—to show that their arms are all right, whether they are in good form, and the like, and I think that it would be possible for us under this scheme to get an army which is far larger, of course, than the 24,000, which will be in active training at any particular time.

Continuing, the Hon. the Minister said: There are some other points which have given rise to a good deal of discussion. There is, for instance, the question of language, and I am accused of having dragged this question into the Bill, and taken a leaf out of the book of the Hon. the Minister of Justice. (Laughter.) I do not think that hon. members, when they come to think closely about this matter, will find that a different solution of the matter is possible than the one in the Bill. Men will have to be trained through the language they properly understand, and the words of command, which are not numerous, will have to be put to all of them, so that whether an English or a Dutch officer commands them he will be able to address them in either language In the police department the same thing is done. The officers taught each in their own language, and when it came to evolutions or words of command they had learnt all these words in both languages and could give commands in either language or in both languages—and the men responded quite well. I think the solution here proposed, if adopted, will get over the difficulty of language in our defence force at once, and the sooner we get over this point the better, because the intention is to make the defence force of South Africa a system which will bind together the social elements of South Africa. (Hear, hear.)

I now come to a question of great importance—the question of officers—(hear, hear)—and I am not certain that this question is not the most important part of the whole scheme. Hon. members will see from a study of the Bill, that there will be two classes of officers, which will be quite distinct. In the first place you will have permanent officers, who will be permanent servants of the Government, in the pay of the Government, and whose whole time and duties will be devoted to the Government service. They will be officers at the headquarters and district officers—area officers, as they are called in Australia ; and the country will be parcelled out into divisions. We will have a permanent officer in each district, who will be responsible for the registration and incidental matter of administration, and the like, which arise within that area. We will require a limited number of these men in South Africa, and these will have to be very carefully picked out. The other class of officers will be of an entirely different character, and these will be the men who will actually be in command of the citizen forces. They will be taken from the ranks. Hon. members will see that all over the country there is some suspicion that the idea in this Bill is to take officers from one part of the country—from the towns, say —and impose them on the rural areas, but hon. members will see that it is impossible to do that under this Bill, and it is forbidden, because this Bill provides that the officers will be taken from the ranks, and will come from the district. We are not going to have an alien system of officers imposed—English officers on the Dutchspeaking section, or Dutch officers on the English-speaking section. That is so much moonshine, and there is no basis at all for this fear. These officers who are in command of the citizen force in the various rural areas will not be paid ; of course, they will be a very important part of the system, but we shall ask them to give their services gratuitously as ordinary citizens ; and we shall ask from them more training than I have sketched for the ordinary citizen—in view of the importance of their position. We will arrange a course of training and instruction to those who want to become officers.

I have sketched the whole now of this citizen force scheme. In each district these young citizens will be arranged according to what they like. I can understand that in certain parts of the country, especially in rural districts, men will come forward with their horses and say, “We prefer to be trained as mounted troops.” In other parts of the country they may not have horses, and they may say: “We prefer to be trained as dismounted troops.” It would be left entirely to each locality and to the citizens that come from each locality to say in what form they will be trained ; but, as far as possible, we shall make an effort to see that you get self-contained units by territorial arrangement. I am sure that, with the training which it is proposed to give to them, we shall have quite an efficient force. I think, before I go further, I ought to refer to two subsidiary organisations which we propose to create, that is, the Rifle Associations and the Cadets.

In regard to Rifle Associations, as I said, it follows really upon my scheme, under which only a portion of the population are going to be actively trained for military purposes. If you adopt that scheme, then, of course, you have portions of the population that are not so trained. These we do not want to escape entirely. We want to teach them, at any rate, the elements of shooting, so that every man in this country will know how to handle a rifle. (Hear, hear.) As hon. members know, that is a most important part of the real art of warfare—to know how to handle a rifle. It is not the most important part ; but it is a very good part. That will be done. Therefore, the proposal we have is that these young men who are not actively trained men shall enter a Rifle Association. We have a system of Rifle Associations, which will be organised under Government control, which will be administered through these areas by officers stationed all over South Africa, and which will give people the chance of undergoing this actual rifle practice. But, of course, we do not restrict it to these men. Others may join, too, who are over the age of 21 years, which is the compulsory age ; by their thousands and tens of thousands men in this country who are keen on rifle shooting will join, and although it will be an expense to the Government providing people with rifles and ammunition, still I think it will be money well spent. (Hear, hear.) I am sure it will be a very popular part of the system, and I am not sure that it will not be possible from this scheme of Rifle Associations to get to a certain amount even of military efficiency. We will train one part of the population on a fairly stiff basis for a start. Others we may start very gently by way of Rifle Associations, but hon. members will see that there are some innocent clauses in this Bill which will enable us to give a little training also. In that way, by easy stages and slow progress, I think we shall get to universal training. This would be an expensive part of the system, because we should have to provide people with rifles and a certain amount of ammunition, which they would have to fire off per annum, not, of course, at game. (Laughter.) It is the only part of the scheme that I have not seen criticised, and people have approached me from various parts of the country asking me whether it is not possible to put this part of the Bill into operation at once—(laughter)—and delay somewhat the operations in regard to active training, and cadets, and so on. I am afraid one will have to take the bitter with the sweet, and wait for these Rifle Associations coming into force when the rest of the Bill comes into force.

The other subsidiary organisation is the cadets, and, of course, I know that there has been a great deal of criticism on this part of the Bill—(hear, hear)—and criticism which I also approach with a great deal of consideration. (Hear, hear.) The system which is here adopted is not a system of complete compulsion. Hon. members will see that what is proposed here is this: that boys between the age3 of 15 and 16, taking them up to their 17th year, can be compulsorily trained as cadets under certain conditions. The first condition is that it is an area which the Government proclaims for this purpose. The second condition is that, as long as the child is not at school, the parent can object to the compulsory training of the child. The compulsory provision applies only to schoolgoing children in those areas which are proclaimed for cadet training. Now, what hon. members will see is, that it would be very difficult to have a universal compulsory system of cadet training. The best organisation to work through, of course, is the schools. It would be very difficult to collect children wholesale from all parts of the district, it would be a foolish system to bring them together for cadet training. The only way in which you can work it, and in which the cadet system has been worked successfully so far, is through the schools. But, in order to work the cadet system by schools, you require schools of fairly large numbers. If you take an ordinary school and set aside the girls who cannot be trained as cadets—(laughter)—and take the boys who are above the age of 13 years, you may have a very small number left and, unless it is a very large school, it would not be worth the trouble of applying this scheme. Therefore, I may say this to hon. members, especially on this side of the House, among whose constituents there is a great deal of difficulty about cadets: in rural areas it will be quite impossible to work this cadet system on a compulsory basis. It is proposed in the large schools, in the populous centres, where you will be able to have a sufficient number. Now I have been asked to go further with regard to parent’s option and, of course, we shall have to follow this suggestion very carefully It is suggested that we should go further and give each parent in every case an opportunity to object to the compulsory cadet training of his children. (Hear, hear.) I have an open mind on this question, because I am sure if we allow parents to object these objections will not be so numerous as one might think, and that the result will be that, even if you give parents this option universally, only a small number of them will exercise the option. I do not know that it will really interfere with the efficiency of the system. A child who has passed through the cadets is absolved from the recruits’ training. I know there is a considerable amount of objection to making little children drill, and I am not sure whether we ought not to change it to some extent.

I think there is a great deal in another system, and that is the Boy Scouts. (Hear, hear, and Ministerial laughter.) The Boy Scouts are a voluntary association of a private nature which we cannot recognise as it is, but it contains very valuable military elements. I am not sure that we cannot vastly improve on our cadet system by grafting on to it a number of principles and practices in vogue among the Boy Scouts. I am told that in the Free State, where the people object very strongly to the cadets, they like the Boy Scout system. To me a rose is very sweet by whatever name it is called. (Laughter.) We may evolve a scheme which will eliminate the faults of both systems and work very satisfactorily.

For the purpose of administering and controlling the force you would have to create a very small department which does not at present exist, with a headquarter staff and a couple of staff officers to look after the technical arrangements.

The next question is how are you going to arrange for the command in regard to various bodies forming the defence force. I do not think it would be advisable in this country to appoint a Commandant-General for all these forces. If you do that you are going to raise questions which it is far better, at any rate in the initial stages, to leave alone. A much better course is to appoint separate officers for those branches of the defence force, who will all work under the Minister of Defence. You will appoint a Commandant for the permanent forces, another for the citizen forces, and another officer to look after the cadets. At present we have a number of commanding officers for the cadets, and I propose that we should abolish them and have one officer to command the whole. The coast garrison force does not raise a very difficult question of command, for as long as we carry out the present system, we have the Imperial officers, who can be of great assistance to us in this matter of command. Nor does the question of command arise in the matter of the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve. For the others, we shall have to have officers of considerable standing, all working under the Defence Department.

Another bit of machinery is intended to be created under the Bill—a Council of Defence. The matter is to be tentative, and as a matter of fact I have had considerable difficulty about it. A Council of Defence may be a very strong link in the scheme, but it may become its weakest link. One point seems to be quite clear—that the Defence Council should have nothing to do with the ordinary administration of the defence force. Once you take away Ministerial control, you create a bulwark behind which a weak Minister may shelter himself in a time of great emergency. The Defence Council should be an advisory and consultative body in regard to points which arise under the Bill. I can conceive a number of points on which the views of the Council might be of the greatest assistance to the Government. Take, for instance, the matter of the arrangement of areas and the distribution of the forces. Government might usefully consult a Defence Council on these matters. Power is taken under this Bill by which over certain areas compulsory balloting may be suspended. It would be possible in that case to inaugurate a system of favouritism, which would be entirely detrimental to the public interest, and in that case the Defence Council should be consulted. An enormous number of regulations will have to be drafted, and it seems to me in regard to these regulations it may be very useful and a great help to the Minister to be strengthened by the advice of the Council of Defence. And these regulations as they appear from time to time, might, I think, very well be placed before that Council before they are put into actual operation. In that way it will be possible to make of the Council a body of real importance and service. But, of course, if we go further we shall be following a course not existing in any part of the world. If we entrust controlling and administrative functions to this body we shall do what has not been done in any part of the world, and we will create machinery which will lead to an inefficient system. Different views are held by hon. members who have thought carefully over this question, and we should hear these views. I think that an advisory consultative council to deal with certain large matters in this Bill will be of service, whereas administrative bodies will be really more a drag on the machine. I need not refer to a number of subsidiary provisions contained in this Bill. Hon. members will see from its chapters that a great deal of detail is introduced in regard to commandeering and other matters all of the greatest importance in time of war, but, of course, which speak for themselves and need no argument from me to commend them.

One point more I wish to refer to, that is the subject of discipline, because some difficulty has been raised on that point. Chapter VII. deals with discipline, officers, and legal procedure. It is Laid down that the Government may adopt a system of Military Courts and military discipline, the Military Code, as a matter of fact, in existence under the Army Act, with such modifications as are required by the circumstances of South Africa. People who do not reflect on these clauses jump to the conclusion that what is being done in this Bill is to take over the British Military Code under the Army Act and to make that the law here. That is the impression.

There are a number of details which I shall not refer to because I am rather anxious to get on to the next part of our question, and that is how it is proposed to start this scheme in actual operation. That is a very important point. Hon. members will understand that with a big scheme such as this you may find that although your principles may be perfectly sound and in order, you may start your scheme in such a way as to dislocate existing machinery and create only confusion. I have thought very much over this question, and I think that it is due to the House to say even at this early stage what it is proposed to do to initiate this scheme. Let me take again the various branches of the Defence Force to which I have referred. With regard to the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve it will not be difficult to create the necessary organisation. The necessary organisation already exists. The same applies to the Coast Garrison Force. There we have a nucleus which we only require to expand to make more efficient, as we will under the Bill, and no great change will be necessary. We shall have to create a similar force at Durban, but that will, I assume, give rise to no difficulty. In regard to the South African Mounted Riflemen, the question will be easy, too. All that will be necessary will be the arrangement, and that will be done very carefully, as to those parts of the South African Police that would have to be organised into regiments of South African Mounted Riflemen. As soon as that has been done the commanding officer can be appointed, and it can be started without any difficulty. The difficulty arises in regard to two questions, the starting of the citizen organisation and also the existing organisation of volunteers and militia in various parts of South Africa, and how it is intended to deal with them in the initiation of the new scheme. In regard to the Citizen Force, hon. members will see that it is most important for us to have a number of carefully selected officers and well-trained officers, to be appointed at the initiation, for those areas into which the country is to be apportioned.

We would not require a very large number of men, but for the whole defence force of South Africa, officers, adjutants, and others, we should require a certain number, 30 or 40. These men will have to be selected, and my idea is to arrange for a school of instruction. If the Bill is passed, then from July 1 next it is proposed to have a school of instruction at Bloemfontein, where these officers will be collected, and where they will be put through six months’ training course, as was done in Australia at the initiation of the Act. This school will no doubt become the nucleus of the military college we propose to start as part of the defence system.

I hope to constitute the school very carefully. The personnel of that school has given me a great deal of trouble, but I think that we can arrange that school on a sound and efficient working basis. The idea is to take an officer of the Cape Mounted Rifles and another from the old Staats Artillerie of the Transvaal, then a British officer, and I have the idea that it would be possible to secure the services of General Aston. General Aston, as hon. members are aware, is chief staff officer to the Commander-in-Chief of the troops, and he has had a great deal to do with this Bill which is now before the House. He has also been a professor at one of the chief military colleges, and he is also well versed in duties that might arise out of or in connection with this Bill. I should be glad to have the advantage of his services in controlling this school. Then having the school, the idea will be to collect the men, the officers who are going to start this scheme. It is a delicate matter, and a matter that is of the utmost importance so far as the starting of the school is concerned, because it is highly important that you should select officers who will be of the greatest assistance in the future. Therefore, these officers will have to be carefully selected. We have forces to select from—men who had been properly trained—and I think it will be possible to select fairly and properly officers whom we could look to to carry out this scheme efficiently in its early stages. The idea is to give these officers a six months’ course to enable them to learn their duties under the Bill, and then from January 1 next to actually start the scheme. The next point is as to what is going to happen to the volunteers and the militia, which is our defence force at the present time. Hon. members will see that there are a number of clauses, 43 and others, in which certain powers are reserved to the Government in this regard, and I want to explain the intention of the Government in regard to these forces. If hon. members will look at the present forces of volunteers and militia in South Africa they will see that the bulk of these forces is most happily situated so far as the defence scheme is concerned.

You take the Cape Peninsula. Here at the Cape you have a force of close upon 2,000 men, about 1,800 to be exact. Of course, the Cape Peninsula is of the utmost value for military purposes. Here you have a number of corps at the very point, and it is simply a question of establishing these forces, as they exist here, on the new lines—that is, bringing them up to the strength required under the Act, and allowing them to proceed on their careers with our blessing. Going further afield, you find that you have another big defence district in the Transkei and on the Eastern frontier. There you have forces, and it seems to me that all that is required is for these corps to fulfil the conditions under the new Bill—that is recruiting up to full strength. Then you have another division at Kimberley, which is also an important area under the new defence organisation. There is, of course, no defence force in the Free State, but going to the Transvaal, you find that there are 2,000 or 3,000 men on the Witwatersrand who, under any scheme of defence, will be of the greatest use. You also have two other corps in the Transvaal, spread over the rural parts of the Province. In regard to these two regiments I don’t think that we would be acting wisely in maintaining them on the present basis, because they cover enormous areas, and it will be necessary, owing to the country, to divide the Province under the new scheme into smaller areas. A reconstitution of these two corps will have to take place. So far as the corps on the Witwatersrand are concerned they will be able to pursue their careers after they have complied with the provisions of the new legislation. In Natal the position is almost the same. At Durban, Maritzburg, and other places in Natal, you have corps which are very happily situated from both a geographical and strategical point of view There are a number of small corps, I believe, which are not so happily situated, and some re-organisation will have to be effected in those cases. With regard to the great bulk of the corps, as far as I have studied the question, they all seem to me to be most happily situated, and the only thing we need to do is expand them up to the strength required by this measure, and wish them successful careers. Then we will have to deal with parts of the Union where no defence forces exist. In some rural parts of the Cape Province and in the Orange Free State we will have slowly but deliberately to break fresh ground, and found units that will slowly work up to the standard which we set in the Bill. I think that if we deal with existing organisations on the basis which I have suggested—the necessary power is given by the Bill—they will be able to carry on successfully. Any of these corps that wish to go on can expand in conformity with the provisions of the measure. I shall not disband any of them, but allow them to go on if they find it possible to do so. I will now ask hon. members to follow me in regard to the financial—and most important—aspect of the scheme. I am going on the assumption that it is not a paid force, and I have arrived at some figures which I will detail to hon. members. The Volunteer forces of the present time are run on different lines to that which we propose in this Bill. Certain grants are made to corps by Government in respect to efficient members. The commanding officer is held responsible for the financial administration of the corps, and he must see that the corps does not get into difficulties. We propose an entirely different system. Here it is proposed that Government shall undertake the burden which has up to the present fallen on the shoulders of the commanding officer in connection with the financial administration of his corps. We will have paid permanent officers all over South Africa, and Government will be responsible for the financial administration of these corps. That is the system that is proposed. No grant, save a horse allowance and horse assurance will be made, and Government will pay for any simple uniform that is found to be necessary.

The scheme which I have sketched will cost, in the future, when it is in full working order, £1,172,000 per annum. That includes the cadets, rifle associations, citizens’ force, permanent force, and all that. Of this the Government is already paying £852,000, and hon. members must bear in mind that the Government is already paying about half a million in respect of the defence force that exists, and they are paying hundreds of thousands of pounds for the police we are taking into this scheme. If hon. members make the necessary deductions they will find the additional cost of the defence scheme I have sketched will be £320,000. What are we going to get for it? For this we are going to get an efficient striking force of more than 2,000 which we did not have before. Beyond getting that striking force we are going to get an efficient artillery service. We are going to get a permanent artillery and artillerists even in excess of what is required for the permanent force, and we are going to get a defence force which will be a great deal more efficient than the defence force based on the volunteer system. So that hon. members will see that for this £320,000 we are going to get all these advantages and sound training for our officers from the military college.

The country, I think, notwithstanding some grumbling you hear in various odd corners, is ripe for some such measure as this which is now before the House, and I would ask the House, for after all we are responsible for the due government and safety of this young nation, to rise to the occasion and give effect to this spirit of patriotism which is to-day moving in South Africa, and bring into effect this scheme, not without due consideration, but as soon as possible. I am sure we should not delay, because no one knows what danger we may be in for, and no one knows the delay there may be in carrying through this scheme in the future. (Hear, hear.) We know we have to provide for our own defence, and that the eyes of all other countries are on us. We have to-day the greatest mineral resources in the world, and I may say we are commanding the gold reserves of the world, and will continue to do so for another hundred years. (Cheers.) We have the biggest goldfields in the world, and the biggest deposits of the cheapest coal to be found in the world, and we are a large, spacious country, which is still undeveloped. No doubt nations, in their expanding activities in other parts of the world, will, more and more, turn their eyes in our direction. Well, we have seen the difficulties in the past, and we do not want our country to be made a pawn in any International game. Our object is to provide for our defence in such a way and on such a scale, and on such a basis, that other nations will be warned off in advance. (Cheers.) If that is to be done, then we will have to take on us this additional burden, this financial burden. It is a burden that will be brought home to every citizen in this country, because we shall be making a general appeal to the patriotism of the people, because we ask half of the people to be trained and the other half to pay ; and in that way we are asking every household in this country to aid us. I hope members of this House will see their way to help me, and before the end of this session we will give to South Africa a defence scheme which I am sure will be efficient. It has its political bearings as well as its military bearings, and I am sure nothing will bind the people of this country together more than such a system as this. People will be trained together for the service of their country, and will be trained together to respect each other more and more. (Cheers.) It is a long and important Bill, very complicated in its provisions, and I think it would be the proper course, after the second reading, to send it to a Select Committee, which can consider more closely the details than I have been able to do to-day, and I shall move accordingly, after the second reading, that this Bill be sent to a Select Committee for further consideration.

The Minister, speaking in Dutch, briefly dealt with several points of the Bill which more particularly interested, or had given rise to difficulties or misunderstanding amongst, the Dutch-speaking section of the population.