from Tom Henry Morgan, clerk, South African Railways.

from W. Stephen, late Port Captain, Table Bay Harbour Board.

from H. Sundstrom, late prison warder, Cape Town Gaol.

Return showing particulars of special warrants issued by the Governor-General 24th February to 26th March, 1912

asked if the Minister of Railways were going to lay on the table a list of the special warrants issued by the Governor-General with regard to the railways.

replied that he thought the return had been laid on the table, but if it had not been, then he would do so.

asked the Minister of Finance if he would lay on the table particulars regarding bewaarplaatsen and the revenue derived therefrom.

Whatever information I have I will lay on the table.

moved that the House at its rising to-day adjourn until Wednesday, the 10th inst., at two o’clock p.m.

seconded.

hoped that the House would not agree to the motion. If the Government’s intention was to give hon. members a holiday surely one day was not sufficient. Could the Government not extend it to Monday week? (Ministerial-cries of “No.”) Why was it that the Government were taking away the only day that private members had? He himself had nothing on the paper, so that he was not personally affected, but the rights of other private members were seriously affected. The Government should have intimated their intention a few days earlier.

A few weeks earlier.

said that as hon. members had not received any intimation of the change they were unable to make any arrangements to go away; they would have to spend the holiday in the vicinity of Cape Town, and would derive no benefit from it. He moved an amendment to substitute “Tuesday” for “Wednesday.”

seconded the amendment.

said that he wished to join in the protest that had just been made. The Senate had already complained of not having sufficient work to go on with. A few weeks ago when the question was raised hon. members were distinctly told that they would only have a holiday till Tuesday. There was no reason whatever why the House should not sit on Tuesday. They would only be twiddling their thumbs on the seashore instead of doing their work. It might have been better had the Government given them due notice and enabled them even to visit their constituents and tell them of the great work they had already done.

said he had consulted the Leader of the Opposition in connection with the motion. Borne members had asked him (the speaker) to adjourn to Wednesday, to which he had agreed, provided the Leader of the Opposition would agree. The adjournment until Wednesday was to meet the convenience of members. The Government had no objection to sit on Tuesday. He left the decision to the House.

thought it was desirable that he should explain what had occurred as far as he was concerned. Yesterday he received a message that the prime Minister desired to see him, having first seen the leader of the Opposition, in connection with two matters. The principal point was that before the House adjourned they should pass the finance matter at present before them. He then informed his right hon. friend that it was utterly impossible to expect an important debate of that sort to be closed before the House rose for the Easter holiday. The Prime Minister also made a suggestion that the House should adjourn till Wednesday. So far as he was concerned he said that he would raise no objection. He pointed out, however, that the time allotted to private members was extremely restricted, and that if the Government proposed to adjourn the House till Wednesday, it would be only fair for them to make a statement to give private members reasonable time to bring forward their business. Before the House met that day he told his right hon. friend that certain members objected to an adjournment till Wednesday because they had not made arrangements. His right hon. friend then said that if that was the case he would not bring the motion on at all, which information he conveyed to the hon. members who had spoken to him on the point. He was surprised that the Prime Minister had now brought it up. When he (the speaker) said that these objections would be brought forward the Prime Minister said that he would only move an adjournment till Tuesday. Five minutes afterwards his right hon. friend moved the adjournment till Wednesday. This was not a party question. There were hon. members on both sides who desired to adjourn till Tuesday. But his right hon. friend had a caucus discussion with his party.

That is not so.

concluded by saying that it was a matter that should be left to the convenience of members.

said that there was really no use in adjourning the House till Wednesday. The majority of the members would simply be wasting their time on the seashore. Perhaps the right hon. gentleman would reconsider the position.

said that as a matter of fact hon. members from the North would rather not adjourn at all than have to be back by Tuesday. He pointed out that some were able to get away, and hoped to return by the mail train which reached the Cape on Wednesday in time for the sitting of the House. He hoped the extra day would be granted.

said he was willing to do what would suit the convenience of hon. members of the House. He pointed out, however, that he had a motion for the appointment of a Select Committee on Tuesday’s paper, and he asked the Prime Minister whether he would allow this and other notices of a formal character to be taken on the Wednesday. If it were pushed on to a future day, it might not be reached by the end of the session.

said that the discussion that was taking place would show the unwisdom of merely suiting the wishes of hon. members on two front benches. Acting according to the notice, one of his colleagues had gone up country, and could not be back before Wednesday. They would rather have a three weeks’ recess, and then come back and do real business. (Laughter.)

said had he known of this notice of motion—he had just come from Port Elizabeth—he would not have hurried back as he had done.

The amendment was negatived.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that from and after Wednesday, the 10th inst., the House suspend business at six o’clock p.m., and resume at eight o’clock p.m., also on Wednesdays.

seconded.

asked for some information as to the legislation which the Government proposed to introduce during the present session. It was rather unusual to sit four nights a week at such an early stage of the session, and, speaking for himself and he thought for other hon. members, they found it very difficult to come prepared to deal with important legislation. Only last Monday they sat until half-past twelve, and he pointed out that many hon. members were on Select Committees and were sometimes in the House from ten in the morning to eleven, twelve, and even half-past twelve at night. He hoped some agreement would be arrived at so that the House would rise at a certain time, and he hoped the Minister would make a statement on the subject of the legislation to be introduced.

said that if no other Bills were introduced than were before the House already, he calculated that they would keep the House busy for another three months; and it was the Government’s intention to introduce other measures.

asked if the Right Hon. the Prime Minister could state what they were.

said that it was difficult at a moment’s notice to state exactly all the measures which it was proposed should be introduced, but he thought they would be the following: The Public Service Bill, the Land Bank Bill, the Immigration Bill, the Provincial Financial Relations Bill, a Fencing Bill, and the Police Bill. These were the most important measures which were not as yet on the table of the House, and it was the intention of the Government to get them through as soon as possible—that was, if the House were of opinion that it was very necessary that these important measures should become law that session. The Government did its best to expedite business, and not to waste the time of the House. During the two months the House had sat, various motions had been introduced by his hon. friends of the Opposition, and the Government had sacrificed weeks of time so that these motions could have adequate discussion. Continuing, he said that the time of the House was taken, up not because they wanted to serve the Government, but because they wanted to serve the interests of the electors and the public. Members of the Cabinet were also members of Select Committees, and the same thing applied to them as applied to other hon. members who were on Select Committees, besides which the former had their administrative duties to attend to. If they did not sit at night they only sat for four hours out of the twenty-four, and that might be all right for those hon. members who had their business here; but if they were going to have a six months’ session every year, what would happen? Would the best kind of professional men or the best type of agriculturist stand for Parliament? He would not be able to neglect his business so long, and the result would be that instead of the best type of men coming forward they would have professional politicians doing so. Members who lived in Cape Town could attend to their business in the mornings and go home in the evenings, but other members had to entrust their affairs to other people. No business man or farmer could afford to leave his work for six months every year, and the result would be that the most capable men would refuse to stand for Parliament. He hoped there would be no objection to the motion.

said that he did not agree with his right hon. friend. They were starting Union, and they had an enormous task before them, and everyone of them must make a sacrifice. In Australia, after they federated, they sat for 10 months in the year because there was such an enormous amount of work to be done. They should not scamp the work. He asked whether it was the Right Hon. the Prime Minister’s intention to have Wednesday evening sittings, because that was not what the motion read—it meant they did it every night and also on Wednesdays. He suggested that they should leave out the word “also.”

said that part of the time in Australia Parliament had sat every other day. What they complained of was this: there was very important business before the House and some extremely important Bills were still to be introduced. A good many hon. members had to be there every morning at 10.30, and if they had afternoon and evening sittings what time did they get to consider that legislation? They were not afraid of work, but they wanted time to consider these things. He agreed that there was a lot of work to be done, but they wanted time to do it well. He thought that the country could well do without some of these Bills which had been mentioned. They did not want to shirk work at all.

said that it did not seem to him, if the House was going to sit four nights a week, to be possible to give proper consideration to all that legislation. Their experience last session was that they rushed through Bills at the end of the session and had to introduce measures amending the various legislation that had been passed before. That did no good Many important Bills had to be passed, and if they had no time to study these Bills the invariable result would be misunderstanding. If there had been more time allotted for the study of the Bills they would have passed through the House without any difficulty. On that side of the House they had done their best to facilitate the work of the Government, and now they heard that the discussion upon the Budget should be limited. There were many members on that side who were entitled to express their views. Most of them who sat there were busy people, but they could nor possibly undertake’ to give the necessary attention to the measures now before them, if, in addition to ordinary committee work, they were asked to tire themselves to death by sitting all hours of the night. They had a case yesterday where a Bill went into a Select Committee and a certain alteration was fathered by the Minister in charge, and yet when that amendment came before the House, the hon. gentleman’s supporters delayed the time of the House by discussion upon that amendment. He certainly hoped the House would not agree to this.

said, although he agreed with a good deal the Prime Minister said, still he could not agree with his statement that they were wasting the time of the House. The right hon. gentleman said that the measures on the table of the House would take over three months, and those Bills that he had in his mind would take another three months. What they wanted to know was whether the Prime Minister intended keeping them there six months? Surely he did not want to keep the House sitting for six months, because he was not prepared to sit that time.

moved that the word “also” be omitted.

seconded the amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

The motion, as amended, was agreed to.

said in making the remarks he intended to offer on the Budget, there were two important matters which the House would have full opportunity of discussing. The first was the status and grading of the Civil Servants of the Union. In regard to this matter, it was the intention of the Government, immediately after the recess, to introduce the Civil Service Bill, and ample opportunity would be afforded the House to discuss this important question in all its bearings.

Another question was in regard to the arrangements for adjusting the financial relations of the Provinces. Those were entirely provisional arrangements, and did not affect the Estimates, and to legalise the proposals the Government would have to bring in a Bill, and when that was done they would have ample opportunity of discussing the merits or demerits of those proposals. He was sorry that the lead given by the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Sir E. H. Walton) in this respect was not generally followed by hon. members. In regard to the Budget statement, he thought it was common cause that the Minister of Finance deserved their congratulations upon the clear and simple statement which he had submitted to the House and the country. (Hear, hear.) As to the speech of the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Sir E. H. Walton), he did not think that the hon. member’s remarks carried much conviction. He laboured the question of the high salaries of Civil Servants. Well, he (Mr. Krige) was not there to defend high salaries—(hear, hear)—but he considered that if they looked at the question of salaries they should, at any rate, do so in a fair spirit, and consider the surrounding circumstances It had been said that the salaries of Civil Servants were screwed up to the highest pitch. He had gone carefully through the Estimates, and he had failed to find any proof of that allegation. (Hear, hear.) The high salaries to which the House could reasonably take objection were salaries fixed before Union, salaries protected by law and protected by the Act of Union. To that Act of Union, the hon. member for Port Elizabeth was a party.

He had also gone into the return laid on the table in reference to officers appointed from outside the service. He did not intend to deal with it as a whole, but he should refer to the Department of Justice which appeared to be principally assailed by hon. members opposite. He found from the return that the total appointments made from the date of Union to January 31 last were 220. Of these, 123 were temporary hands, leaving a balance of 97. If they deducted the professional appointments and technical appointments, numbering 40, they had a balance of 57 officers, apparently still in the employ of the Department from outside, practically all daily-paid, from 7s. 6d. to 10s. per diem. He found from the Estimates before them that last year, excluding officials in the Prisons and Police Departments, and taking the Department of Justice pure and simple, they had in the Estimate for 1911-12 1.578, while in the present year’s Estimate they had only 1.323, showing a decrease on last year of 255 officers. The Estimates further showed that, if they had eliminated the increase for the police vote, the Department of Justice would this year have shown a decrease of £40,000. There was one other matter he wished to refer to, and he did so with regret, because he hated to make racial comparisons But the Government had been accused of having looked through racial glasses in making their appointments. He would refer to the return again. Of the 220 officers appointed from outside, he found that 130 bore pure English names, 82 bore Dutch names, and eight bore other names, so that they had a majority of 40 bearing English names over all others combined. The member for Cape Town, Central, smiled, but he defied the hon. member to make an analysis of that list and say what his conclusions would be. He (Mr. Krige) had been passing his mind back a few years in the history of the hon. member for Port Elizabeth, Central (Sir E. H. Walton), and thinking what the hon. member’s conduct would have been had he been Minister of Finance for the Union. The hon. member had specially inveighed against the high salaries, although he admitted that the finances were in a, flourishing condition. But, in 1904, when the hon. member for Port Elizabeth was Treasurer of the Cape, that colony was passing through a period of dire financial distress—(hear, hear)—but, notwithstanding that, he forced through the House an increase of salary for the Attorney-General and for the General Manager of Railways, and he burdened the pension list by awarding a pension of £600 to an hon. member who at that time sat behind him (Sir E. H. Walton), who was not entitled to a penny. (An HON. MEMBER: “Shame.”)

Did he cut down his own salary also?

Ministers’ salaries were cut down by the right hon. member for Victoria West under his retrenchment scheme, but he (Mr. Krige) believed that the then Attorney-General (Mr. Sampson), in face of strong opposition from the public, did not draw the full increase. Continuing, Mr. Krige said the Union Government was doing its best under the most trying circumstances—(hear, hear)—and it must be remembered that a great deal of the expenditure was protected by law. However, the printing vote seemed entirely out of proportion to the needs of the Union. (Opposition cheers.) It might be that a portion of this vote was due to the dual language system. If that were so, the House would not shirk its responsibility. They were not so narrow-minded as the hon. member for Von Brandis (Mr. Nathan), who, whenever he referred to that vote always tried to have a slap at the Dutch language. Nevertheless, he (Mr. Krige) hoped some curtailment of the vote would be found possible; perhaps that might be effected by shortening the length of the Blue-books on the lines of the one containing the report of the Department of Justice. The Minister of Finance had referred to certain articles which unfortunately are still imported on a large scale, but which ought to be produced here, and the Minister also foreshadowed additional taxation next year.

Holding the principles he (Mr. Krige) did, and representing a constituency which believed in Protection as a means of promoting agricultural and other industries—(hear, hear)—he thought he was justified in saying that it would be very difficult for him to support any scheme for further taxation unless that scheme be accompanied by a thorough revision of the Customs tariff, a revision of which would tend to stimulate the agricultural and industrial interests of the Union. A protective policy, according to the world’s history, had done more to encourage and build up nations than a Free-trade policy had.

Where?

said the time had arrived when the Union should get a firm and stable Customs tariff. They had before the House irrigation and land settlement laws. These he considered essential foundation stones on which to build the future prosperity of our Union. But it was difficult to build on these unless the people were fortified by a wise fiscal policy. Last year we imported wheat and flour to the value of £1,285,000, a laudable decrease on the previous year of £309,000. The Union possessed a sufficient area of suitable ground to grow wheat in large enough quantities to feed ourselves and also for export. But they would never reach this laudable state of affairs unless more protection were afforded them. The Gape and Free State farmers had during the past season sold their wheat at a loss, and they deserved the thanks of the House in showing and increased production notwithstanding that they were labouring under disadvantageous conditions. Personally he recognised that it was impossible for the Government to deal with this subject this year, but the settlement of the Customs tariff would be one of the greatest steps in the history of the future of South Africa. Government should submit a Tariff Bill which would show that they were the real leaders of South Africa and imbued with the true South African spirit. (Ministerial cheers.)

said that he wished to refer to the remarks made by the hon. member for Caledon with regard to the demand made for protection of wheat. He knew of one farmer, who was about 100 miles from any great consuming centre, who would get 7s. 6d. a hundredweight for his wheat. He was quite satisfied, and it was difficult to understand why farmers nearer a great centre could not also be satisfied. He thought that there was something illogical in the demand. The hon. member had referred to the hon. member for Port Elizabeth, and to what he had done when Treasurer of the Cape. He felt bound to say that no Treasurer in South Africa ever had such difficulties to contend with. He was suddenly called to face a shortage of £4,000,000 in the actual revenue of the Colony. He made the best use of his brains, and went carefully through the Civil Service List, and deducted very largely from almost every salary in the country, and if he did give a few high officials increases he out down the salary of his colleagues on the Ministry, which was about as honourable a thing as he could do. He thought that the criticism offered by the hon. member for Port Elizabeth remained effective. It had not been set aside in any particular. He was the first to draw attention to the very serious fact that the Treasurer had already appropriated a large sum, which he apparently used twice. The fact was that the Treasurer had been holding that sum very much in the position of Mohamet’s coffin, between heaven and earth. He pointed out that every newspaper in the country that dealt with finance at all brought that £800,000 or £900,000 to credit up to the very time the Treasurer made his Budget speech, and, instead of estimating the surplus at £400,000, put it down at something like £1,300,000. That proved that the impression extended beyond the House of Assembly. He maintained that the Treasurer had practically intercepted a sum of £865,000 from the Public Debt Commissioners of the Union. He did not see any financial soundness in carrying that amount forward to the credit of Union funds. Everyone was agreed that at present we were on the crest of a wave of prosperity, and surely, therefore, we should make some provision against the lean years. In regard to the financial relations between the Provinces and the Union Government, he noticed that the Treasurer agreed generally with the Financial Relations Commission report. The Cape had some very serious complaints to make in this connection. As far as the £ for £ principle went—which was the underlying principle of the Commission’s recommendations—if they looked closer into the figures, they would find that the Cape Province would in a way be cheated out of £200,000.

There was another point to which he would like to call attention. He saw on a certain nage of that Commission’s report that the land revenue of the Union amounted to £160,000. Now, looking back to one of the Cape Statistical registers, he found that in the year before Union the land revenue of the Cape Colony was £145,000. He took it that what was really meant was that £160,000 represented the land revenue that was still raised in the Cape Province. If he added his £200,000 to the £160,000, he found that the Cape was short, by the Hon. the Treasurer’s proposals, of £1 for every £ on £360,000. Then he wished to say something to the Minister for Education. He wanted to bring him to book, if it were possible, in connection with University matters. They had been going on for two years. They had a large sum dangled before their eyes, and what had become of it? He was told, that his hon. friend the Minister was at fault. Now, that was a very serious charge; it seemed to be so because he was told that if his hon. friend had gone about things in the right way the money would be forthcoming. As things were at present, the real higher education of the country was hung up. Continuing, the hon. gentleman went on to refer to the Minister’s recent conference with the Administrators. His hon. friend told the Administrators the other day that, in spite of the terms of the Act of Union, he was going to make a very serious change in regard to one part of public education. He referred to the training and examination of teachers, which the Minister proposed to remove from the Provincial Administrations. Surely, if the Provincial Administrations were going to have charge of primary education it was natural that the examination and training of teachers should be in the hands of these Administrations. He really thought the Provinces ought to have the most say in the training of Provincial teachers. Now his hon. friend, at the conference of Administrators, said that he, as Minister of Education for the Union, was going to take charge of the training of first-class teachers and certain of the second-class teachers. He did not know what authority his hon. friend had from that House to do any such thing. He would like to say that at the present time his hon. friend had no machinery in existence for the training or examination of first-class teachers within the Union; he believed, however, that the Cape Province had a serious grievance in this regard, for up to this time all teachers were trained under the Education Departments of the Provinces. He believed that the Directors agreed to the principle that the Provincial Administrations should have the sole charge of the training of their teachers. Only the previous night, according to a local paper, the Director of Education in the Transvaal, speaking to teachers at Pretoria, drew attention to that very point. He did not know whether Mr. Adamson had spoken without his book, or whether he could be called to account for what he had said. Mr. Adamson, as reported, had said he thought it would be a mistake for a central authority to interfere with that freedom which the Provinces had enjoyed, and which they had put to such good use. The Minister was going to bake away part of that freedom, and he was doting so without bringing the matter to the notice of the House. He was doing so, and at the same time hanging up University matters in a way which was not very creditable to himself or for the good of the country. Continuing, he said he disagreed with the Prime Minister in regard to the taxation of natives in this Province as compared with the taxation of natives in the other Provinces. His right hon. friend seemed to have forgotten this important fact—that they in this Province had been setting up year after year a system of granting individual tenure to their native population. Thirty years ago, he (the speaker) took part in the first step forward, and ever since he had watched the progress of the matter with the greatest amount of interest. He only rejoiced at the fact that the natives concerned had risen to the ocoasion, and made the best use of the privileges which they enjoyed. These people were put on the Land, and became peasant farmers. All these natives had been exempted from such taxes as the poll tax. They paid quitrent to the Government on the land which they occupied. He pointed out that these natives could not be treated in the same way as they treated the barbarian native, and added that they contributed a great deal to the Government’s coffers in the way of indirect taxation. They helped very Largely to swell the Customs revenue of the country, and the produce they raised for export was very large.

There was one other general matter he would like to deal with. Replying to a speech of an hon. member on the crossbenches the other day, the Minister of Native Affairs said that it was part of his, and part of the Government’s policy, to set up no barrier against the native worker. If the Minister of Mines would take the trouble to look through the mining regulations proclaimed under the Mines and Works Act, he would see that there were more than a dozen barriers there against the native population. (Mr. JAGGER: Hear, hear.) He would refer especially to two which, so to say, were the zero and the zenith. The zero set forth that the captain of the native scavenging squad in any of the mines must be a white, and not a coloured, man. Had they ever heard anything like it? Again, in the South African College technical training was not forbidden to the sons of respectable coloured men to qualify them even to the standard of engineers in the Union. But under one of these regulations, they found that no certificate granted by any college outside the Transvaal would be available inside that Province. He hoped that his hon. friend would look to that matter, because what was the use of dangling proposals of higher and technical education in Cape Town, and in the town contributing, and contributing very heavily, in rates towards the South African College, when, on the other hand, they told the sons of ratepayers that that was as far as they might go, and no further? It was not only a disgrace to the Minister of Education to allow that to stand, but it was throwing dust in the eyes of these people.

said that he was sorry to see that the Minister of Railway and Harbours was not present—(Opposition cheers)—because he wanted to deal with some railway matters. He was glad to hear that there was to be an adjustment of railway rates, and he hoped that the North would benefit by that. He hoped that wood and iron and cement, which were largely used in the North, would receive the benefit of the adjustment. He could not see, however, why there was still some discrimination shown in favour of the Transvaal in railway rates, because they all expected that after Union the rates would be levelled, while at present there were still great differences. It did seem to him to be unfair that under Union they should still have that discrimination, and he hoped that when the adjustment took place, the Government would take that matter into serious consideration. At present merchants on their side fould that they were not able to compete with the Transvaal. Not only did they carry goods for considerable distances in the Transvaal at a lower rate, but they found a curious anomaly which he could not explain. They found that, as far as the carriage of wool was concerned, they carried wool from the Transvaal to Port Elizabeth at a much lower rate than from his district, the figures being 2s. 1d. as against 3s. 3d. There was nothing to create a worse feeling than that—that after Union there was that discrimination between one Province and another.

Then as regards the Refreshment Department on the railway, they found that up to Kimberley there was one tariff, and further North there was another, and a higher, tariff. A bottle of Colonial wine cost 1s. 9d. on the line between Cape Town and Johannesburg, but north of Kimberley (on the line to Vryburg) it cost 3s. The prices of meals also were higher; and when the Catering Department had been approached, their excuse was that they had to take in supplies at Kimberley, where prices were higher than at Cape Town, but that would not hold water, because higher prices were not charged when the trains left Johannesburg, where the price of living was also higher. Then the Department did not sufficiently, he thought, encourage Colonial products, and they found that Schweppe’s soda was used on the trains instead of Colonial soda, although at Mafeking they could get quite a good Colonially-manufactured article. Yet they said that it was not in the interest of the Railway Department to use the Colonial article, and they used Schweppe’s instead!

The figures showed that they had about 24.000.000 morgen of Crown land. The Minister had already told the House that he intended to bore for water, but all the Government could show was one bore hole in Bushmanland. There was a tremendous cry to-day from people who wanted to get back to the land and who would be willing to take up thousands of morgen of land if they could only get it. The Department was doing absolutely nothing. If they found that, in two years only one bore hole had been put down, what likelihood was there of doing anything at all during the life of the present Parliament. If he wanted to tackle this question seriously, the Minister would have to get from 50 to 100 drills. Continuing, the hon. member said that he was very glad to listen to the speech of the Prime Minister and to hear what material progress had been made in the country since the war. And when they took into consideration how farms had been knocked about and how farmers had improved their stock and gone in for general improvements, the outlook was very encouraging indeed. The Department of the Prime Minister was the most important in the Union, and it ought to be in touch with the needs of the people. Farmers in later years had commenced to understand the benefits derived from science. In the Cape Province they had very few veterinary surgeons; in two vast territories like Beehuanaland they had only one. Another matter of importance was that the department should provide experts for the purpose of going round the country and showing people how to make butter and cheese. This industry in his constituency had made very great progress, but greater progress would have been made throughout the Union had there been more experts. Horse breeding had received a very severe How during the war, and what the Department should do today was to import thoroughbred stallions and jacks. They found that there were only a very few men breeding on a very large scale, but more would take it up if the supply of stallions and jacks was greater. He was not intimately acquainted with the working of the Civil Service, but they had consolidated the four Provinces into one, and they had only a small white population. He thought it was regrettable that the cost of running the country was so great. It seemed to him that there was room for a great deal of further retrenchment in the country. They, had been told that they had retrenched considerably, but they had also taken a lot of men into the service, and so he did not think that the Government were carrying out the promise they made to the House last year. Some men had been taken into the service who were bilingualists. He did not say a word against that, but men had been retrenched whose services the country could not do without, and a lot of temporary men taken on. They knew that the heads of departments looked upon these men with sympathy, and they would ultimately be put on the fixed establishment, with the result that the pension fund was being swollen to vast dimensions. The Civil Service was out of all proportion to the number of white people in the country. To his mind, one fatal mistake made by the Government was this: that they kept on all these officials from the Transvaal who were getting higher salaries than the men in the Cape. He thought the Government should have taken advantage of the opportunity of pensioning these men, so that they would have been in a position to introduce a lower scale of salaries.

Proceeding, he said they found that the Civil Service was making a tremendous hole in the finances of this country, and, not only that, but it was monopolising the time of that House. He supposed the hole in the finances of this country, and they had got hon. members opposite, who were looking after their interests. (Op position cheers.) It seemed to him that the time had arrived when the Government should consider whether it was not possible to remove the Civil Service and their grievances outside that House. (Hear, hear.) He was glad to hear that the Government intended to bring in a Bill to settle-the rights of Civil Servants once and for all, and he hoped that they would then go a step further and appoint a Civil Service Board, that would deal with the rights of Civil Servants and remove the question from the sphere of political influence. (Opposition cheers.) He was not altogether satisfied that the Government had done everything in their power to economise as much as they could. He would take the Department of the Treasurer. In the Cape Province they had a simple and effective system, whereby revenue was collected by the Civil Commissioners of the various districts. Since Union was established, a Receiver of Revenue had been appointed at Kimberley, Port Elizabeth, and East London. If the Government had wanted to economise, they ought to have extended the Cape system, which was a less expensive and quite an effective system, throughout the Union. Mr. Wessels also criticised the scheme for the concentration of gaols introduced by the Department of Justice, and said he could not understand how any economy could be effected by that scheme. He went on to say that he was sorry the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs (Sir David Graaff) was not in his place. He thought the House would agree with him when he said they hoped that the Minister would be restored to health—(hear, hear)—and that in the future he would be able to take his seat in that House. (Cheers.) He wished to congratulate the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs upon the establishment of agricultural posts in this country. (Hear, hear.) He thought something should be done to extend the telephone system. In regard to outlying posts, he considered that where people were living on the outskirts of civilisation the standard of whether it would pay or not should not be applied to any application which they made for postal facilities.

Those people who lived in outlying parts where Dutch was spoken had a grievance against the Government, because it did not study their interests sufficiently by always sending officials who could speak to the people in their own tongue. There was a very small percentage of bilingual men in the Civil Service, and it was very unfair to the men who knew both languages that they should be penalised and sent to outlying places because of that knowledge. (Hear, hear.) Every effort should be made to encourage the unilingual man to learn the other language. But even when a little gentle stimulus was applied by Government to this end it was misunderstood by hon. members opposite—(hear, hear)—who called it a breach of the Convention. The interests of the Dutch-speaking people should be considered and the men in the Civil Service drawing the taxpayers’ money should take that into consideration and try and make themselves acquainted with Dutch. (Ministerial cheers.) They were told that an Englishman was a very bad linguist, but he had a better opinion of Englishmen than that. He had seen a good many Englishmen who had come here with a determination to learn Dutch, and they had picked it up quickly, but not so quickly as a Scotsman—(laughter)—and he had seen an Irishman pick up the language in one year. He (Mr. Wessels) was not a racialist. If hon. members opposite had a little more consideration for the Dutch-speaking people they would not have taken up the position they had done over this matter.

On the railway service vote?

There is no one more popular than the hon. member for Pretoria East, and I have often wished he could employ some of his eloquence to impress on the English-speaking people in the Civil Service that it is their duty towards the Dutch to make some effort to learn that language.

I have done it very often.

If other hon. members will do the same we shall get on better than we have done in the past—(Ministerial cheers)—but not if a gentle stimulus is to be looked on as a serious breach of the Convention. Suppose the position were reversed, and suppose the Civil Servants only spoke Dutch, he often wondered what a hue and cry would be raised in that House. (Ministerial cheers.) The Dutch-speaking people were a very long-suffering race, and submitted to things which other people did not. (Hear, hear.) He did not want to hold out any threats whatever, but he could assure hon. members opposite that there was a very strong feeling throughout South Africa that the Dutch were not going to give away any of their language rights; they were determined that whatever happened this bilingualism should be carried out. (Ministerial cheers.) The Dutch did not want to suppress the English language, but they felt that both languages should be equally treated. If his hon. friends opposite would take the trouble to place themselves in the position of the Dutch-speaking people and would realise that men who were taxpayers would like to be spoken to in their own tongue, then he was sure that hon. members opposite would realise that it was only fair that men in the Service should make some effort to learn Dutch so as to be able to converse with the people in their own tongue. Then they on the Government side of the House would be perfectly satisfied. (Ministerial cheers.)

referred to the position of, the Civil Servants of the Union. There was hardly an hon. member who had not had representations made to him regarding the grievances of Civil Servants. In a dim way he had foreseen that under Union there would probably be some difficulties in the nature of those now prevailing, and it was with a view to obviate that that he had moved in the Cape Parliament that it should be an instruction to the Cape delegates to safeguard the interests of the Cape Civil Servants. The motion did not receive the sympathetic consideration he had hoped it would from the then Prime Minister. Owing to the straitened financial position of the Cape the Civil Servants there had been called upon to make considerable sacrifices. In the Transvaal, on the other hand, their finances had been in a flourishing condition, and the Cape Civil Servants who went up to positions there soon found themselves in an advanced position in comparison with their old colleagues in the Cape, and advanced even beyond their old superior officers. Natal had suffered in a much lesser degree, because they took the precaution to place their Civil Servants in the same position as they would have been had there not been in financial difficulties. Another consideration in the Cape was that the Prime Minister wished to gratify a perhaps laudable vanity to enter Union with a surplus. One would have thought that it would have been one of the first actions of the Government to rectify these differences and to do justice to their Civil Servants, and that they would in the first session have brought in a Civil Service Bill. But instead of doing what was fully expected of them, the Government in a way wished to preserve the Civil Service as a sort of Government reserve. They proceeded to dispense with certain officers and to make appointments, and far worse, they proceeded to replace men by others from outside the service. Now, after two years of representations, chiefly from the Opposition side, the Government had been reluctantly brought to the position of acknowledging the justice of this request. The Civil Service Bill, which he hoped would be passed that session, had been dragged out of the Government by their representations. They were a minority, but at their back was the great bulk of the Civil Servants of the Union. He wished to address a few remarks to the Minister of Railways and Harbours. The country was at present engaged in trying to settle whites on the land. That was not a difficult problem. The difficulty was to keep them there. If they were not given means of communication with the rest of the country they were bound to fail. It must be recognised that many of the people whom they were trying to resettle on the land had been driven off the land by a number of different influences. The absence of railway communication was, however, a contributing factor. He did not understand the policy of development as carried out by the Government. Different countries had been quoted as examples of development assisted by Government. What lesson could they learn from the country where progress had been greatest, namely, America? There the policy had been to build railways into virgin country. All that was required was to satisfy them that the country was capable of development. Here the Government wished tile people on the land, and to be producing, before giving them means of communication. When the Government constructed a railway there had always to be a guarantee that it would pay at once. They saw that if they went back into the history of railway communication. In building the main trunk line the Government’s idea was to run the line to Kimberley, following the shortest possible route. The same thing applied in the case of the line to Johannesburg. The intervening country was not considered at all in the construction of these railways. That might be called business principles, but that policy in the construction of railways and public works was not calculated to promote the development of the country. It always seemed to him whenever he had to make any representation of this kind to a Minister that nothing could be got out of the Ministry, although the demand might be just and proper, unless one was a supporter of the Ministry, or by constant worry one became a thorn in their side.

He would like to say something in regard to the financial proposals as between the Union Government and the Provincial administrations. He could not say that he had studied the subject very thoroughly, so he would not go into the question of the fairness or the unfairness of the proposals in the report. The proposals, as they stood at the present time, were intended to be fixed as a permanency—a system of taxation for the maintenance and construction of roads and bridges in the Cape Province, and was a system of taxation which was imposed by the Divisional Councils, and which he might call an immoral system of taxation. The road rate and the educational rate in this Province was based upon the value of property, not upon the prairie or unimproved value of property, but the improved value. A man who went in for improvements increased the value of his property, and increased the burden of taxation which fell upon his shoulders. It was a thing which tended to discourage the improvement of property. If the Government intended to perpetuate that system of taxation in the Cape Province, and considered that it was a good system of taxation, why was it not extended to the other Provinces? If it was a bad system of taxation, they should do away with it altogether? He hoped that the Government would give this point earnest consideration.

said he would like to refer to the speech which the Prime Minister made the other day. The Prime Minister had then pointed out the enormous development that had taken place in agriculture in the country. He (the speaker) would point out that at the present time, agricultural development in many parts of the country had practically come to a standstill, owing to a want of irrigation schemes. They had heard a great deal about irrigation, but as representing a district which was very much concerned about this matter, he would like to say something on the subject. He pointed out that in the district of Ladismith many schemes were pending, but these could not be carried out without the assistance of Government. The schemes were of such a character that they would have to be embodied in an Act such as the one that was placed before the House the other day. He urged upon the Government to make surveys in the district of Ladismith. There was one particular part of his district where such a scheme would be of immense advantage, and would open large tracts of country to agricultural development. He would like to say a few words on the question of afforestation on many of their boundaries throughout South Africa. He could remember in the South-western districts when the mountains were thickly wooded, and when the water supply was practically perennial. Mountain fires had swept those plantations and denuded the slopes of the hills, and they had done nothing towards restoration. He did think that the Government should go in for some scheme of afforestation, because it would be of the greatest assistance to the districts concerned. He did not say that the Government should bear the whole of the cost, but some system of local taxation might be arranged. Continuing, he said that the Minister of Commerce had promised that he would tackle the Customs question next year. He was sorry that the Government had not seen fit to bring in’ the necessary legislation this year. This was the second session of the Union Parliament, and throughout the country, on the platforms of the South African party, they were led to believe that their party was a Protectionist party.

They had large deputations from the country; they had discussions in that House on the subject, and they had been told that that question was to be tackled, as a Whole. The grain farmers of the Western Province, the sheep farmers in the Northwestern parts, and also in the Midlands, were beginning to look upon that question very seriously, and he did hope that the Government would come forward next year at an early date, and let them know the lines of their policy, and let them protect where necessary. They were a young country, and unless they went in for a system of Protection, he did not see how they could compete with other countries, which were very much further advanced than they were. A good deal had been spoken about railway rates, and that the hon. Minister was going to reduce them by £750,000. He wanted to throw out a hint. On account of their geographical position in that country, those who were far off the railway line found that they could not possibly compete with those who were far more favourably situated, and got a reduction on their transport. He wanted to throw out this hint: whether the Minister could not consider some question of a rebate, based on the mileage of a place away from the railway? These people had always willingly paid towards the shortage which there had been during the bad times. Now that the Government was going to reduce the railway rates, he did not see why it should not give a rebate to those parts situated a long way from the line. How it was to be worked he thought he could safely leave to the Minister, and he hoped that he would consider that question; and if he could not do it, he would suggest that the railway contribute towards the main roads of those districts which were contributing towards the railways. If they could have these main roads kept in a decent state of repair and order, it would go a long way to assist their farmers. As to the question of bilingualism, he need not say much, and the question had been ably dealt with by his hon. friend (Mr. Wessels) just now. There was only one hint he wanted to throw out. Now, in the old days at the Cape, they could obtain a copy of their Statutes in English or in Dutch. Now, if he, as a Dutchman, wanted a copy in Dutch, why should he be compelled to pay for an English copy as well, and the other way about? (Hear, hear.) He would draw the attention of the House to this fact: that the Statutes in the old days at the Cape were sold at 3s. 6d. a pamphlet copy, and published immediately after the House rose; today, they were costing the public 15s. and they must take copies in both languages. He did hope that the Government would arrange some system to publish these Acts, for the sake of economy and for the sake of not unduly overcharging the general public, in separate English and Dutch copies. It was a question which had been repeatedly brought to his notice by members of the legal profession, and that there had been a considerable delay in publishing these copies. Although the House rose in April last, the copy was only published in December, and unless the public accumulated the different “Gazettes” as they were published from time to time, they were considerably hampered.

dealing with what the Minister of Finance had said with regard to the Financial Relations Commission and the favourable position of the Cape Province, said that they in the Cape Province had admittedly been over-taxed before Union; and now that provision of the Minister, in consultation with his colleagues he supposed, was that they in the Cape Province, having regained their position, were to be permanently over-taxed. Still they were not in the position they ought to be, although there was no more patent medicine tax, and they had the reduction of railway rates. The Minister had said that the Cape Province was £200,000 to the good, but they would have to be persuaded of that. The proposals which had been before the Provincial Administrators showed most gross partiality, and there was no other word for it. It was easy to see why they had been accepted. The Administrators, firstly, were executive officers, and not independent. A proposition had been made to give enormous advantages to three Provinces at the expense of the fourth. He understood that this proposal was to be brought forward in the form of a Bill to regulate the matter by statute, but if the Minister wanted to bring in a Bill he surely wanted them to discuss it. Apparently all he did was to make a proposition and then leave the House. What the felt hurt about was that the Minister did not frankly say, “We have gone into Union, and you have got a Province which has a large white population and Very large material development, and in some respects in advance of the smaller colonies; will you make some sacrifice to put the smaller colonies in the same position?” But he did not do this. The position they were in today was largely owing to the unfortunate attitude taken by the right hon. the member for Victoria West, who said the Cape Colony was bankrupt. He knew perfectly well they were not bankrupt.

When did I say that?

You said that when you were persuading the Cape to accept Union.

I said nothing of the kind.

said that he would call to witness members of the Cape House of Assembly and people in Cape Colony that the right hon. gentleman had used that term. Two days after the right hon. gentleman made his speech he met a man in the street who said he had received a cable from a lady, for whom he acted as agent, desiring to withdraw all her South African investments. They never admitted that Cape Colony was bankrupt. It had been suffering under a cloud of depression but its stability was undoubted. It had recovered its stability, The Treasurer said it was impossible for them to ask the Provinces to tax themselves. He would like to know why? They had certainly fair representation in that House, more in fact than they were entitled to, and in the Senate they had equal representation. In Natal, if they took the Commission’s report, they would find that Natal needed £51,000. That would amount to three-eighths of a penny in the pound. The Free State wanted £40,000, which would amount to one-eighth of a penny. If they looked at the Estimates for 1911 they would see there was an item for £214,000 for roads in the Transvaal, and for the Cape Province £91,000 over and above what she raised herself. Based upon that were figures which they were asked to accept under these financial proposals. In the Cape Province they all paid for their roads. Under the proposals of the Finance Minister the Transvaal, which was supposed to find all the funds for the Union was to receive £214,000 for the purposes of its roads. He had never heard of anything more inequitable. Then they had also had the matter of railway rates dragged in. Who was to blame, he would like to ask, if the Transvaal people were overtaxed on the railways? He said the Transvaal itself. (Hear, hear.) They had themselves fixed inordinately high rates between their border and their consuming centre. In the Cape they had for years accepted the proposition that railways should be used for the development of the country. They all wanted that, but do not let them take things which were a legacy of the past and apply them to the present. Let them, now that they had Union, use their railways for legitimate purposes.

The hon. member for Umbilo (Mr. Robinson) had dealt with some of the aspects of the figures that the Minister of Railways quoted in that extraordinary report which he had laid on the table of the House. Those arguments that the Minister deduced from the figures seemed to him (Mr. Struben) to be about the most unfair thing one could possibly imagine, and some of them were clearly exposed by the hon. member for Umbilo. He (Mr. Struben) noticed again that the Minister in charge of that matter was out of the House. He had not been in the House the whole of the afternoon, as far as he knew, and yet an important matter concerning his department was being discussed. He would suggest to the Minister of Finance, who seemed to be in charge of the House, whether he would not accept the adjournment of the House pending the arrival of the Minister of Railways. (Hear, hear.) It was very difficult to know where they were. (Laughter.) In dealing with these reports the Minister had made an unwarrantable attack upon Durban and Salt River, not in so many words, but by implication. (Hear. hear.) He had quoted extracts without telling the true bearing of the figures which he quoted to the existing conditions in those places. In the Majority Report, which the Minister quoted from, it was perfectly clear that they laid stress on the effect of varying conditions, etc. But the Minister never told them that. He gave them the figures as if they were final and conclusive and absolutely proved his case to the hilt. They knew that the workshops at Bloemfontein and Pretoria were in a much higher state of efficiency than the workshops at Salt River and Durban, because, in the latter shops, the machinery in many instances was antiquated, the space was cramped, and the conditions were adverse to efficient work. There was one more remark he wished to make. It was said that the people living at the coast did not contribute anything to the railways and that they should pay for the harbours. Let them accept that. Then he would say that the people at the harbours or who lived near the harbours should be exempt from any taxation that was devoted to scab eradication, East Coast fever, Barbary ostriches, and Field-Cornets. (Hear, hear.) The coast people were paying enormous sums. Railway rates did not mean everything. As to the people who lived inland, the people at the ports did not drive them there, but they went from their own choice

Who paid for the railways?

I think you will find that the townspeople paid for most of the railways, and that the benefit from them was derived by the country people. (Hear, hear.) It was generally said during the time income tax was imposed in the Cape that it was being paid by the townspeople and that the country people were getting off.

Proceeding, Mr. Struben said that an enormous amount of trade was being lost because of a lack of rolling stock. Although eighteen months ago the Railway Board reported that the supply of rolling stock was insufficient—notwithstanding that about a million pounds’ worth had been ordered from abroad—the matter had not been dealt with. The Minister of Railways and Harbours had made no attempt to explain to the House what he intended to do in regard to the matter. Owing to an extraordinary financial juggle by the Minister of Finance the Railway Board was induced to forego £870,000, so that the Minister of Finance could have an apparent surplus at the expense of the financial stability of the railways. But it was no use going on with railway matters when the Minister of Railways and Harbours was not in the House. (Hear hear.) With regard to the increased amount required for pensions, there had not been retrenchment, but a pushing out and a taking in. (Hear, hear.) The latter was done without statutory authority, and without any regard to the people in the Civil Service when the Ministry took office. He would like to see the Civil Service Bill and to see what safeguards were being made; for instance, what safeguards were being made in regard to the entrance examinations. At present there was only one qualification for admission to the Civil Service in the mind of the Minister of Justice; it was unnecessary to mention what that qualification was. The Minister had retrenched men of long service and had kept on the short service men, who might have been got rid of with a gratuity. Suppose there were two men each drawing £450 a year—one with six and the other with eighteen years’ service.

Both had the same salary, £450 per annum. The man with six years’ service would receive a gratuity of £225. and the other a pension of £186 per annum. Suppose each of them was 38 years of age, and each of them died at 58, the long service man put on pension would have cost the country £3,720 and the other only £225. This might be finance, high finance, heaven-born finance, but it did not seem common sense. It was said that figures, could prove anything.

Quite right. (Laughter.)

said they wanted common-sense finance. Patronage and favouritism had been shown in the matter of retrenchment and replacement, and this would not have taken place had other people been in office. It was a hard thing to say, but he thought that it was perfectly true. The Treasurer had said in a very airy way that there was no question of any injustice to any Civil Servant, and that no man was receiving lower pay than at Union. He believed that was the case, but in various ways the Government had placed these people in an extraordinarily unhappy position. In regard to pensionable allowances, he thought they had been interfered with most unwarrantably. There was the case of an officer who, before Union, was an inspector in one of the Provinces. The man was now made senior clerk, in fact, de-graded. There were other things than pay to be considered. Civil Servants wished to preserve their dignity. There were many other cases in the Agricultural and Audit Departments. Many of the Cape Civil Servants had been put under men with a much shorter service. The man with experience was the more valuable to the country in the long run, unless he was a fossil. And these officers felt it when they were placed under men with much shorter service, just as much as if they were placed under officers receiving a lower salary than themselves. The Government should recognise that these men wanted some recognition of their position and their status. The obvious way out of it was to treat new men on a different footing to old officials. They wanted the Civil Service Bill, but they had not seen it yet. He saw a cartoon in the paper that morning representing the Minister sitting on this Bill.

He is hatching it. (Laughter.)

said that the cartoon reflected the true position. He believed that the Bill was ready, and it would be no indignity for the Minister to lay it on the table, while it would save much discussion. The Minister told them the Other day that the regrading was done on the recommendation of the Civil Service Commission, but it seemed strange to him that the Department of Justice was reorganised before ever the Commission got inside its doors. He believed that the Audit Department was reorganised and regraded, and the Commission never went inside. What was the explanation? Proceeding, he asked for an explanation of the treatment of a certain officer who was head of a Department in one of the Provinces. He was written to by the Minister and told that his salary would be at a certain rate because of his increased responsibility. The Commission and the Advisory Board recommended that that salary should be given. What happened? In the Estimates his salary was reduced by £250. On whose authority was that done? There were other cases in the Entomological Department and in the Forestry Department where specific promises were made and afterwards departed from.

Continuing, he pointed out that there was an enormous difference between the salaries paid the heads of departments and those immediately under them. They appreciated the Prime Minister’s statement that at the head there must be highly skilled, technical, and highly paid men, but if they wished to keep good men in the service and train them for these positions, then the Government must hold out some inducement. He thought they should give better salaries to those men just below the heads of departments. He quoted the case of a clever young South African who had previously studied for the position of an agricultural expert, but who turned his attention to medicine on the advice of an influential Civil Servant, who said it would be hopeless for him to go on as things were at present. They must not have false economy, and he instanced what happened in the Transvaal in connection with the outbreak of San Jose scale. Then he would advocate in the lower grades of the service that the men be paid weekly instead of monthly, and he pointed out that it was a very vital question to the people concerned. These men said that when they were paid monthly they were millionaires for half-an-hour and were then without money for the rest of the month. In certain departments of the railway this was done, and he thought that the system should be extended to other branches of the service. He would, perhaps, be told that it would cost more in accounting, but he did not think that this should prove so great an obstacle. It would be better for the men and it was a system that found favour with merchants who came into contact with these men. The hon. gentleman went on to quote a passage from the report of the Controller and Auditor-General with regard to fixed deposits in banks and the observations of that official on the subject. Again, with regard to the matter of the bewaanplatsen, apparently there had been no attempt to settle that matter at all. It was said that there should be a test case, but that was impossible, as one could not bring an action to compel the Government to pass a law, and nothing further seemed to have happened. Surely if they had any regard for the credit and good name of their country they ought not to let such a thing pass, and the Minister ought to assure the House that at the earliest possible opportunity the House should deal with that matter and deal with it in equity and justice. It seemed to him that it was not right for the Minister to throw those sums of money into the revenue at all. Proceeding, he said that the question of the printing vote had been brought up by the hon. member for Bechuanaland (Mr. Wessels.) The Acts passed by Parliament last session had not been printed by September, and the officers of the House had to order that the Acts should be printed. By whose fault, he asked, did that extraordinary thing take place? The hon. member went on to quote from a copy of the Explosives Act, which he said was printed at the Government Works, which contained some humorous printers’ errors. That sort of rubbish, he said, was being turned out by the Government Printing Department, and if the Money which they could save on that were spent on having a good meteorological department there would be some use in it. There was a first-class meteorological station at Johannesburg, one at Kimberley, which was maintained by De Beers, and one at Observatory, which was maintained by the Admiralty. At present their own meteorological and statistical reports were lamentable. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, the hon. member moved the adjournment of the debate.

seconded.

before the motion was put, said that the Minister of Finance had, he must say, been present during practically the whole of the discussion on the Budget. True, during a time on Wednesday night he became irritated, and left for a time. (Laughter.) The House had listened very carefully to the speech made by the Minister of Railways and Harbours when introducing his Railway Budget, and in that speech he had made very extensive reference to a report of his department which was not then in the hands of hon. members, the interpretation of which report some hon. members had taken grave exception to. Under these circumstances the House was discussing that question and a very important question of finance, and it was nothing short of an insult to the dignity of the House that hon. members should be discussing estimates of over 10 millions of money and the Minister responsible for the introduction of these estimates was not in the House to listen to the criticisms which were raised, and was not there to answer them. If that were the way in which the business of the House was to be carried on, and Ministers were to absent themselves like that, it was an insult to hon. members, who were there to do their duty. They had a duty to the State and the House to perform, and the House would understand their position.

said he hoped the Minister would make some explanation, because he must know perfectly well that he had insulted Parliament. The Minister’s Estimates were before the House, and they were asked to discuss them and they did discuss them. He would like to know what the Hon. the Minister would say had a Minister from that side of the House acted in this way.

said that during the whole afternoon he had been in a room adjoining discussing very important matters with the General Manager and other officials of the Department. They had only just left him. Nothing was further from his thoughts than that he should insult or show discourtesy to Parliament in any way. He would like to have been present, but he had to attend to matters which he would not have been able to attend to during the present session. If anything had been said he would have to read the papers in the morning and he would also have heard from his colleagues, and he would have given the House an explanation. He could hardly think that this was the real reason for all the fuss, but he wanted the House to understand that he never intended to do anything improper or to Show any discourtesy to Parliament in any way.

During the last hour and a half you have been absent.

If I had been away playing golf that would have been a different matter, but I was attending to the business of the House. Ever since I have been in Parliament this has been done.

Not by the Minister in charge.

said that ever since he had been in Parliament this had been done. What he wanted the House to understand, however, was that he did not intend any discourtesy and he hoped members on both sides would accept his explanation. (Hear, hear.)

said that after the explanation of the hon. Minister he would withdraw his motion for the adjournment of the debate. What he intended to say specially, however, was that Government should lay upon the table the report of the Civil Service Commission. It was all very well to say they were trying to make party capital out of this, they were not. Thousands of Civil Servants were not satisfied with their position and he would ask the Government to lay this report upon the table before they went on.

May I say this for the information of hon. members who wish to proceed to their homes, that there will be a special train at 11 o’clock to-night?

Does it go to Port Elizabeth? (Laughter.)

Mr. Struben’s motion was withdrawn.

said that if he had understood the hon. member for George correctly, he had stated that the salary which was offered to men in the lower grades of the Civil Service was too low, but he did not agree with that. He did think, however, that the salaries of the postal officials and postmasters, when compared with other members of the Civil Service, were too low—(hear, hear)—and they had as many responsibilities as, if not more than, other Civil Servants. Extreme care had to be exercised in regard to telegrams, and postmasters had also to work on Sundays. There was some dissatisfaction amongst postal officials, especially in the Orange Free State. Men had been transferred from the Cape and had been placed over the old Free State officials. These transferred men got a local allowance in addition to the regular salary. It had been said that in the Orange Free State there were not men who were sufficiently competent, but he entirely disagreed with that, and splendid testimonials had been given to some of the Orange Free State officials. He hoped that the Government would look into the matter. If there was one matter which, he thought, was taken up wrongly by the Department, it was that of postal communication in some of the country districts. (Hear, hear.) While some of the postal communications had been improved, in other directions there was no improvement, and a great grievance was felt in his district because the post to Odendaalsrust had been cancelled, owing to which it took six days to get a reply to a letter. Even the magistrate had to complain of that. It was stated that the South African people did not read enough and did not come into sufficient touch with the outside world, but much could be done if there were adequate postal facilities.

Business was suspended at 6 p.m.

continuing, urged the Government fully to consider the question of proper postal communication in the rural districts. The Opposition appeared to be very desirous of having the Civil Service Bill brought up, and the Government had promised to do so as soon as possible. It was generally admitted that the magistrate was the chief person in his district. In the speaker’s district the magistrate had won the confidence of the public, and although he came from England, had learnt to speak Dutch well, and had done much for farming in that district. The magistrate had to report every year, but in his (the speaker’s) opinion the official was too much tied to his office. The magistrate at Hoopstad had barely time to hold his periodical court at Odendaalsrust. It had been alleged that the scale of Ministers’ salaries had set the example for Civil Service salaries, but that was entirely wrong. There was no sort of connection between the two things. He himself had been an official, and could understand what it meant to be a Minister. A Minister had to abandon his business for he knew not how long, whilst an official, on the other hand, went into service for good. The importation of butter had increased by £23,000, which showed there was a good local market, and that the country districts should devote more attention to the making of good butter. Hoopstad had never yet seen the dairy expert, though that district could do a good deal in the matter of the dairy industry. The quality of the wool which was now produced was much better than before the war. Those farmers who lived far from the railway, and those who had few sheep, suffered under the heavy railway rates, which compelled the farmers to sell their wool locally to the shopkeepers. Those shopkeepers gave the same price for year-wool as for half-year-wool, not because the two sorts were equal in value, but because the farmer who sheared twice a year was a good customer. In order to protect the good wool, the speaker thought it would be advisable to charge a higher tariff for the half-year-wool than for the year-wool. It would be an injury to the inhabitants who dwelt far from the railways if the railway tariffs were so reduced that there would be no profits, because clause 127 of the Constitution said that the profits on the railways should be devoted to constructing new lines. He quite agreed with what had been said by the Prime Minister on the native question, on the settlement of which South Africa’s future depended. No rights must be taken from the natives, who must be treated with every justice. There was at present a struggle for existence, and they must not take it amiss that the coloured man was preparing himself for the struggle. The white people must also equip themselves for the struggle by means of education, and the Minister of Education must take care that the white was placed in such a position by means of education that he could retain his position as against the native.

said that he wished to confine himself that evening to matters concerning the Railway Department. He must say that he had been impressed by the remarks of the Minister of Railways and Harbours concerning the value of the railway assets in South Africa some amusement to the illustration of the Is was a matter for considerable congratulation, and he thought they should make a point of seeing that such a pleasant state of affairs continued—they should go on receiving fair value for the money of the country. He found it hard to follow the statement of the Minister as to the relative efficiency of the railway workshops in South Africa—his reference to the inefficiency of Durban. How he was able to make such a statement out of percentages, he was not able to follow. He pointed out that machinery and appliances were great factors in figures such as he gave. The matter of systematic supervision, too, came into the matter. He did not think it was quite right to throw all the blame for such a state of affairs on the shoulders of the men. It seemed to him that those who were at the head of affairs had a good deal of responsibility if they allowed such a state of inefficiency to continue. The point the Minister arrived at, that where they had piecework they had impaired efficiency, might, to a certain extent, be true. He went on to deal with the question of repairs in Natal, and pointed out that in that Province the locomotives and the rolling-stock were subjected to a great deal more strain than was the case in the other Provinces. Taking all these matters into consideration, he thought that the stock in Natal was subjected to very heavy wear and tear.

He was bound to say that the locomotives in Natal compared badly with those of other parts, because of the destruction of the steel tubes in the locomotive boilers. The conclusion that the Minister arrived at that piecework was the best and cheapest in the long run, was a reasonable conclusion. The principle was based upon modern industrialism, which had taken away the manly pride a man should have in his work. When they spoke of piecework, it meant payment by results. Of course, they excepted Civil Servants and members of Parliament, who were not paid by results, and in the case of the latter it was probably a very good thing that they were not. (Laughter.) The hon. member for Uitenhage uttered some weighty words in reference to the iniquity of piecework. He proceeded to trounce soundly his hon. friend the Minister of Railways for saying that payment by results was the best method. The statement referred to by the Minister of Railways was not made on his own responsibility, but on the responsibility of men who had made inquiries, and whose ability was not to be questioned. These were men whose opinions were very weighty indeed. In some constituencies this question of piecework seemed to be a very burning question, but it only meant that those who did more work received more pay. Payment by results meant that those who would not qualify for quality must be prepared to give quantity. To arrive at quality, however, was the harder work of the two. He had listened with some amusement to the illustrations of the hon. member for Georgetown, who spoke about a terrible disaster that might result by the faulty welding of links. He quite understood that it was difficult to detect faulty welding of the links by the eye, but they did not trust to the eye alone. The hon. member evidently forgot that there was a chain-and-link testing machine, and any defect in the links of a chain were soon discovered. He hoped that all railway links were so tested—if not, it would be a very great scandal. He would like to refer to another matter, to a class of railway servant whom he did not think the Minister would receive many deputations from. These were the waitresses in the railway tearooms. They only received £5 a month, and an amount of 5s. a month was deducted from their salaries for breakages. Railway tea-rooms, so far as he was aware, paid very well and £5 a month was not very much to receive by a woman to pay for her board and lodging and buy her clothes. He was very glad to hear from the Minister that he had collected half a million worth of old railway material scattered about over the country. It was quite excusable and understandable when they considered the large areas that they had expropriated in the past. It was quite easy to understand how they could lose all this material. He hoped that the Minister would find it possible to read the report of the Select Committee on lands expropriation, and if he read that report he would not have quite so much land to lose his material on.

In regard to the loss on the harbours mentioned by the Minister, he might refer to a little matter which had come within his own knowledge. He believed that some amount of the loss on the harbours was incurred through the use of antiquated and inefficient appliances, but there was another piece of machinery that had been imported recently in the shape of a clay cutting dredger for the Durban harbour works which came to this country at a cost of £95,000. That machine was tested on the Clyde and passed as perfectly satisfactory, and when it came out to South Africa it was found to be only capable of doing 60 per cent. of the guaranteed work. The result of that was that every cubic yard of clay or dredger work that this machine did cost considerably more than it ought to do. Touching upon the compensation which had to be paid in consequence of the Gaika Loop disaster, Mr. Fawcus remarked upon the increasing importance of locating these danger spots on the railways and of the introduction of vertical and transition curves. He went on to urge the need of the economical construction of branch lines, particularly in regard to heavy and expensive earthworks and masonry work in rough country. He pointed out how profitable had been railways constructed in parts of the country favourable for wattle growing. He also urged that one of the great faults in connection with railway building in this country had been the lack of sufficient knowledge beforehand, and that an exhaustive inquiry as to every possible route should be made in advance. One problem that would force itself on the notice of this country was the best and cheapest way of getting coal from the mines to the coast in Natal. The coal trade, especially in Natal, was at present in its infancy. The true wealth of South Africa, in his opinion, would be found in the coal deposits and not in the gold and diamond mines from which we derived so much revenue at the present time.

Proceeding, the hon. gentleman said that 100 years from now, or (perhaps in half that time, Durban might be the premier coal port in the southern hemisphere, and it might quite possibly, or even probably, be the coal port of the world. He reckoned the gold mines would come to an end in 30 or 40 years, but when they were talking of the coil trade they had to remember that they would last 500 years and, in fact, any time. He wanted to ask how the Minister proposed to deal with the certainties of to-day in regard to the coal trade and the possibilities of to-morrow. Untold tons of coal had to be carried to the coast; and it was only just inferior to the best Welsh coal and superior to the best North Country coal. The traffic they had now of 1½ million tons a year would be ten million tons in time. There were two possible routes which the coal trade could take.”One was from Ladysmith to Durban and the other was from Vryheid through Empangeni to Durban. He favoured he line by Ladysmith via Colenso to Durban. The advantage of that route was that it tapped more directly the coal deposits at Waschbank and Dundee and also at Vryheid and Hlobane. The Minister of Railways and Harbours should never rest until all the possibilities of both these scheme had been properly and exhaustively worked out. He was at present working on a hand to mouth scheme. That was improvements to the main line, which would cost three-quarters of a million; but which, when completed, he would be very little nearer the final solution than he was today. They had a report recommending an absurd scheme of constructing a line from Vryheid to Empangeni down the North Coast at a cost of £5,000,000, but there was an alternative scheme from Colenso which would not cost more than £1,500,000, and there would be a saving of 2,000 feet on rise and fall. These two possible routes of the future needed thorough and exhaustive inquiry as soon as possible. When he referred to an auxiliary coal line he referred to a flat grade line that would not cost more than £8,000 or £9,000 per mile from Colenso. The line from Vryheid would necessitate the rebuilding of the North Coast line, and the total mileage would be 122 miles to Empangeni and 160 miles along the North Coast, which would enable coal to be carried down to Durban at 4s. per ton. The other and alternative route from Colenso would be about 170 miles, giving a total mileage from Glencoe of 230 miles. With a rate of one-sixth of a penny per ten per mile, coal could be conveyed to Durban at 3s. 6d. per ton. A sine qua non of the auxiliary line should be that coal could be carried at the rate of one-sixth of a penny per ton per mile. They had already a very good coal line from Glencoe to Colenso. He thought they would agree with him that the tremendous possibilities of the expansion in the South African coal trade demanded immediate attention. Within the last week, ships had been delayed at Durban waiting for coal, and by the time the main line alterations were made, there would still be the same delays. Sir William Ramsay, in an address before the British Association, had stated that the coal in Great Britain would probably last 175 years. But Trades Unionism would probably drive the coal trade away from England before the expiration of that period—(laughter)—while South Africa might be made the coaling centre of the Southern Hemisphere, if not of the world. (Hear, hear.)

said he wished to speak on the Estimates from a Free State point of view, although by so doing he expected he would be told that was Provincial, because it was only the members of two Provinces who were allowed to speak on Provincial matters without being told that they were Provincial. (Laughter.) In other words, it would seem that the Union consisted of two Provinces only. (Laughter.) Hon. members representing Natal were well able to look after their own little Province, and hon. members representing the Free State were determined to uphold the rights of their Province. (Cheers.) Last year he stood by the Minister of Finance, saying that there should be no undue pressure put upon him, and that even just claims should not be pressed. He also said that the Minister should be given a chance. The Minister of Finance had that chance, and had failed—(An HON. MEMBER: ‘Question.”)—failed to do justice to the Orange Free State. (Laughter.) Last year, he (Mr. Keyter) told the Minister of Finance that the money received by him from the Orange Free State was not an inheritance, but trust money, held in trust for that Province. The Minister of Finance admitted that that was the case. But considering the way in which the Minister had used it, the more appropriate term would be theft by conversion. (Laughter.) He (Mr. Keyter) would not go into details, but would take one item and deal with that, for the same principle was involved in that as in every other item of that trust money. He (Mr. Keyter) was going to take the £40,000 voted in the Orange Free State for hostels. A certain sum of money was voted for specific purposes, which money was obtained by the sale of the late Orange Free State Government’s shares in the National Bank. The vote included: Industrial Institute, £4,000; secondary schools, £16,000; teachers’ residences, £10,000; hostels, £40,000; and new schools, £35,000. He would like to know what had become of the £40,000 taken away in solid cash from Bloemfontein. In the 1910-11 Estimates, the Orange Free State received on paper £5,800. No sooner had this been voted than the Minister of Finance, in the next Estimates, withdrew it again, saying that that was a very good dividend. In the Estimates for 1911-12 they found another sum of £44,200 out of this trust money. His hon. friend added the £5,800 in the former Estimates, and said: Now we owe you £50,000; we shall give you for this year £1,500.” (Laughter.)

That is 2½ per cent. (Laughter.)

said that was the last they heard on that matter. It was withdrawn no sooner than it was given. In this year’s Estimates he found two school hostels, Bethlehem £6,000, and Boshof £4,000, of which, only £3,000 had been spent, and £7,000 must be revoted. Then he found his hon. friend generous enough to put down another £15,000 for other hostels. That sum would be given by the end of 1913, unless the Minister thought better of it and withdrew it was the Minister going to convert that trust money into an inheritance? He hoped not. He would next deal with the wild statement made by the hon. member for Cape Town, Central. He was blindly followed by the hon. member for Calvinia, who made the same statement, namely, that in the Free State they were getting school buildings out of Union Revenue, while in the Cape Colony they were erecting school buildings by loan, and that the Union Government was paying half of the interest, and they complained about that. In the Cape they were fortunate enough to get half the interest. But what did they get in the Free State? Not a penny! They had lost the interest on their money, and it seemed that they were also going to lose part of the capital. Who was the better off? As long as he was in the House he would bring this matter to the notice of the Treasurer.

He regretted that the Minister of Justice was not in his seat, as he wished to address some remarks to him particularly. “I declare here publicly,” he said, “that the criminal prisoners in Pretoria are treated better than the children in the Free State as regards technical and industrial education.” (Hear, hear.) He went on to say that he did not grudge these unfortunates the good things they were receiving from the Minister of Justice, but at the same time, he asked the Minister of Education to look after his fold just as the Minister of Justice was looking after his. When he was in Pretoria, he asked the Minister whether it was necessary for their young men first to become criminals before they could get technical education. He hoped that an improvement would be effected this year, and that provision would be made for technical and industrial education, not merely on paper, but in reality.

Go to your Provincial Council!

I intended doing that, but they send you from one place to the other. (Laughter.) Proceeding, he referred to a point touched upon by the hon. member for Hoopstad. He did not wish to blame the Government. He believed that things were happening of which they were ignorant, and upon which they ought to be informed. There was dissatisfaction in the post and telegraph offices in the Freq State, and he was sorry to say that it was increasing. He trusted that the Government would make inquiries on the matter, as it was not pleasant to be hearing about it continually. There was one great point. If a postmaster in the Free State drew a salary of £300 a year he had to do all the work, and received no allowance or overtime pay. If another officer from another Province took his place he received pay for overtime plus an allowance. That was not right. He was for economy every time, but he thought that justice should be done. (Hear, hear.) He had admired the Prime Minister’s very nice speech. There was one point in it touched upon by the hon. member for Hoopstad, namely, that taxation should be equalised. But before doing that they must see that there was equality of opportunity, and that the various sections of the people had equal chances of paying that taxation. The Minister of Finance had told them with admirable candour that taxation was staring us in the face, and that next year he would ’bring tup a scheme of taxation. He offered him a warning, which he hoped he would accept in a good spirit. Before his hon. friend came into the House with any scheme of taxation he must retrench wherever possible, and reduce those high and princely salaries. He thought that economy should be effected in all departments before there was increased taxation. The people of the country would not bear heavy taxes for the purposes of keeping a few others in luxury.

said he did not think that the House should take the hon. member for Ficksburg too seriously, because he (the speaker) had experience of him on a previous occasion. That hon. gentleman had said that the Treasurer should not introduce new taxation until he had paid attention to the princely salaries that were being paid some of the officials. He would like his hon. friend to point out the officials to whom this country paid princely salaries.

There are too many of them.

Does he not think that before bringing down the princely salaries of officials it would be better to begin with the Ministers? My hon. friend had a chance last year of showing that he could bite as well as bark.

I spoke of salaries generally.

That is the worst of it. He would not dare to speak of particular salaries. Continuing, the hon. member went on to say that it had been stated that owing to the sale of the National Bank, the Free State had been left out in the cold. He did his best last year to make it clear to his hon. friends from the Free State, and he appealed to his hon. friends from the Free State to bring pressure to bear on the Government, so that that Province would derive the whole of the benefits. His hon. friend got up and made a very fine speech, but voted with the Government. If his hon. friend thought that the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, had the £40,000 in his pocket, he was making a mistake. His hon. friend for Cape Town, Central, did not have the handling of the £40,000, and the hon. member for Ficksburg, he thought, had better look to his side of the House for dividends. He was sure he would find them on the other side of the House. He would like to say a few words to the hon. member for Caledon with regard to Free Trade and Protection. His hon. friend seemed to be of the calibre of many Protectionists in this country. He viewed the fiscal policy from the point of view of his own constituents.

Oh, no!

I think my hon. friend made use of the expression himself.

I spoke on principles.

In Caledon. (Laughter.) Continuing, he said he was not a mugwump, and was not going to be one at that late hour. He was absolutely sure that this was not a question that could be decided from the point of view of Caledon. It would be madness for them to deal with the question in such a way. His hon. friend dealt with the question from the point of view of wheat, and argued that wheat should be protected, for the reason that such a large quantity was imported. Who did he expect would pay? Why, the consumer would pay. It was not in order to increase protection for wheat that he made such a proposal, but in order that his constituents might be able to get a little more for their wheat.

Oh, no!

said they ought to encourage the production of wheat, instead of placing further taxation on the people of the country. The country did not consist of wheat farmers. Let him tell his hon. friend that if they were so foolish as to put a protective duty on wheat it would not benefit Caledon, because he knew other districts, in the Free State, which would produce greater quantities of wheat at a much less cost and be nearer the market. If they imposed this duty he was afraid that the Caledon farmers would not benefit, but those in other parts would. In listening to the speeches made, it reminded him of the little boy who shouted out to some boys attacking another, “Hit him hard. He has no friends.” Apparently the Minister of Finance had no friends in the House.

Thank God. (Laughter.)

continuing, said that the speeches he had listened to seemed to be a general condemnation of the Minister’s methods, and what was more to the point, the Treasurer deserved this criticism. The statement of the Treasurer seemed to him like the statement made by the chairman of a company to the shareholders.

What company?

Any South African company—the “South African News,” for instance. Continuing, the hon. member said that the Minister had found he was some hundreds of thousands of pounds short, and so he went to the Minister of Railways and Harbours and dug his hands into his pockets, and after having taken all he could he looked round for another person to dig his hands also into his pockets. He found that there was a matter of £800,000 which had (been saved during the past years and so he seized upon that. It was an extraordinary proposal for a Minister to make. After the speech of the hon. member for George, he (Mr. C. Botha) began to think that things were not what they seemed, and the lucid statement of the Minister was not so lucid as he had supposed. After he heard his hon. friend the member for George, it began to dawn upon him that there had been no retrenchment in expenses, in fact there had been an increase of £12,000 paid upon the amount before Union, because they must take into consideration the salaries paid in the Provincial Administrations as well. He had discovered that they had at least the same number of Civil Servants in their employ as they had before Union. He would like the Minister of Finance to tell him what he meant by saying that there was retrenchment. There was no retrenchment, either in expenses or in men. Would he tell them also why he retrenched at all, if they paid the same amount before Union? The Minister had an extraordinary way of patting himself on the back. He asked his hon. friend to tell them in what way he had contributed towards the result that he ordered himself so much upon. It seemed to him that the Minister could congratulate himself upon his extraordinary luck in the country having during the first year of Union had such a remarkable run of prosperity.

His hon. friend had also congratulated himself upon what he had done in the way of equalising taxation and doing away with inequalities of taxation. What had he done? He had equalised taxation, so far as he (Mr. Botha) had seen, by doing away with the poll tax in Natal, suspending the income tax in the Cape Province, and extending the cigarette tax. All the other inequalities of taxation he had, with the assistance of the Financial Relations Commission’s report, quietly delegated to the Provinces. (Hear, hear.) So far as the Provinces were concerned, they were going to have the same inequalities that they had before Union, unless they were prepared to forego some of the taxes. There were the most unfair taxes in existence to-day in several of the Provinces. He instanced the transfer duty. As to the estate duty, he thought the Minister was preparing for next year. He knew perfectly well that he could introduce this under the guise of co-ordinating the laws, while in reality, if he succeeded in carrying through this estate duty, he was going to add materially to the revenue of the country. It was a trick of the Minister of Finance. He was always getting up a little bit of a plan whereby he was going to score. He under-estimated his income and over-estimated his expenditure, so that he could tell them afterwards how well he had done. He had told them that he intended to introduce fresh taxation next year. He thought the Minister might have given them a little more information as to the direction in which he proposed to introduce fresh taxes next year. The Cabinet seemed to be a mutual admiration society. (Laughter.)

The Treasurer had patted himself on the back and then he patted the Prime Minister on the back by saying that one-half of the gross savings were contributed by the Agricultural Department over which the Prime Minister had control. It was a most touching tribute to the Prime Minister. He always thought it was the duty of the Agricultural Department to spend money, and they should congratulate the Prime Minister if he spent it wisely. Agriculture was the backbone of the country, and when he heard the Treasurer congratulating the Minister of Agriculture on saving money he thought there must be a screw loose somewhere.;(Laughter.) But the Prime Minister was not to be outdone, and when he spoke he patted the Minister of Railways and Harbours on the back for the wonderful way in which he had run the railways. But he had not heard the Minister of Railways and Harbours pat anyone on the back except himself. (Laughter.) But he thought the Minister was patted on the back somewhat prematurely. When he read his statement he felt pleased because it seemed to be good for his constituency, until they got the other facts from the hon. member for Durban. There was, of course, the burning question raised by the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, and that was the question of the relationships between the different Provinces. They always heard a lot about provincialism. He never minded, because he thought during the first few years of Union it was desirable that they be somewhat provincial in order to safeguard the interest of the Provinces. But they must draw a distinction between provincialism and what might be called Peninsulaism. There were certain people who lived in the Peninsula who would not look at anything but from the point of view of the Peninsula. When they had that smell from the sea the people of the Peninsula absolutely denied there was any smell. (Laughter.) His hon. friend hammered away on the question of what the Cape had lost and was going to lose by the relations that were going to be established between the Provinces. He was not an admirer of the recommendations made. They were somewhat crude; but he supposed in the absence of any others they must accept them. He had made a note of to what extent the Cape had benefited since Union and found it had got rid of its income tax. Prior to Union they had suspended the redemption or sinking fund; but since Union they had restarted it. He did not want to deal with the patent medicine tax, but they had a reduction of the railway rates to the extent of £460,000, of which the Cape had the whole of the benefit.

It is not so.

Well, it has been repeated over and over again in this House. Let us call it £360,000.

Try another shot. You are wrong again.

said won’t quarrel about a few figures. Then there is the question of the interest on the capital spent. There has been a dispute about it.

There is no dispute about the capital expenditure.

said it was the interest on capital expenditure—something like £400,000 to £500,000 that the railway was going to pay into the Treasury every year as interest on capital expenditure; and that was all saved to the Cape.

The Prime Minister himself had stated that the Cape Province had benefited to the extent of £400,000. As to the Agricultural Department, he had listened with great interest to the speech of the Prime Minister upon his department. He was most eloquent, and showed them the wonderful results he had achieved. It had struck him as extraordinary, however, that the Prime Minister, who had been Prime Minister of the Union for two years only, should take credit for the extraordinary advance which had taken place during the past ten years. He had noticed that when anything had gone wrong, he blamed the Crown Colony Government for it, and the hon. member for Fordsburg—(laughter)—but when anything had gone right, he took credit for it himself. If there was one thing which the Crown Colony Government had done for South Africa, it was to appoint Mr. Palmer as agricultural expert in the Orange Free State. He did not think that any hon. member who came from the Orange Free State would disagree with him when he said that, so far as that Province was concerned, the greatest portion of the credit was due to Mr. Palmer for the work done by him; and how had the Prime Minister rewarded him? At the first opportunity he got, he had turned Mr. Palmer out of the Civil Service, and, as Mr. Palmer stated, without giving him the slightest warning; and still the Prime Minister had the audacity to take credit for the work done by Mr. Palmer! He had not heard one word of the Prime Minister giving credit where credit was due. Proceeding, the hon. and learned member complained of the inaccurate way in which hon. Ministers sometimes answered the questions which were put to them, and said that the other day he had asked the Hon. the Minister of Railways and Harbours the loss which had been sustained in connection with insurance. He had been told that it was £124. (Mr. SAUER: “You are wrong.”) The Minister need not get annoyed. He was the Minister who was mainly responsible for these inaccurate replies, and so he referred to him. (Laughter.) The actual loss, however, was £8,000. Then, again, it transpired, notwithstanding what the Minister had said, that native policemen had actually been employed in the yards at Bloemfontein looking after the white men. If Ministers did not give them correct answers, it was very difficult for hon. members to sit still and let those incorrect answers go forth into the world. He next asked what steps the Government intended to take with regard to the Appellate Court? He understood from the South Africa Act that Bloemfontein was to be the judicial capital of South Africa. (An HON. MEMBER: “And so it is.”) He wondered if any of the Ministers had read the statement read out by the Chief Justice at Bloemfontein. So far as he understood it, it was that the Court of Appeal should sit at Bloemfontein sometimes, in Pretoria when required, and for the rest of the time in Cape Town. (Laughter.) The National Convention intended to make Bloemfontein the judicial capital and the seat of the Court of Appeal—a real and not a sham judicial capital. He did not care what the people of Cape Town said. It was only their peninsularism. (Laughter.) It was astonishing to think that Government would consent to a thing of that sort without any remonstrance whatever. As to the efficiency of the railway workshops, he thought that Bloemfontein’s 100 per cent. was good enough, but if the men who were said to be superfluous were absorbed, it must be obvious that efficient workshops like Bloemfontein and Pretoria would suffer because of their efficiency.

In conclusion, Mr. Botha said he did not want to go into the language question that night, but to anyone to whom the Dutch language was at all dear it must be obvious that if they were to continue the language that the Minister of Railways employed on the line they would bring the Dutch language into contempt. It was perfectly ridiculous to see the way in which some of the words on the railways were translated, and the same could be said of some of the circulars issued by the Minister of Railways. He had a railway circular that was supposed to be written in Dutch, but it was not Dutch, and if he were asked in what language it was written he could not say. If there was a real intention to keep the Dutch language alive they must begin by not making it ridiculous. He resented the rebuke he had received from the Minister of Railways on this question. The Minister of Railways was the last person in that House who should dare to sneer at anyone on the language question. If the Minister were a lover of his own language he would not make such an exhibition of it as he did in that House. The Minister of Railways could not possibly use Dutch in his ordinary daily conversation, because if he did he would know it better than he appeared to do when addressing that House. It ill became me Minister to sneer at him (Mr. Botha), for although he did not carry a notice on his sleeve that he was a ware Africander so far as his language was concerned, it was better than that of the Minister of Railways’. It was absurd for the Minister to have the audacity to lecture anyone in his (Mr. Botha’s) position on the language question. (Hear, hear.)

complimented the Minister of Finance on his admirably lucid speech. The Minister had to undergo a good deal of criticism, especially in connection with the financial relations of the Union to the Provinces. Some remarks had been made as to the dissatisfaction amongst the Civil Servants, which, however, had not been proved to exist. For many years past Dutch-speaking Africanders had urged that their Language should receive its just rights in the Civil Service. He and his fellow-Africanders loved their language, and wanted to have public officials who could reply to them in it. They were still waiting for that. He was quite sure that the Opposition would not have waited so long if it had been the English language which had been so oppressed. The Minister of Agriculture had also been assailed because it was said he had not done enough, but he (the speaker) asserted that they could not find a better Minister for that Department. In East Coast fever and in other diseases, everything that was possible had been done to combat them. The time had now come when they must spend money on the building of railways in order to help on the agricultural industry. There were still in the north-west large districts where cattle-breeding and farming could be carried out; but in order to do that the first thing was to build railways, and he trusted that the Government would see that that was done. He moved the adjournment of the debate till Wednesday.

This was agreed to.