from inhabitants of Mier, Gordonia, praying to be relieved of the provisions of the Scab Act with regard to the building of dipping tanks and dipping their sheep.

from F. Hunt, late gaoler of Ceres.

from Jan Petrus le Grange Lombard, sen., who on the strength of money alleged to have been spent on behalf of the late Transvaal Government, and amounting to £10,000, raised a loan from the Transvaal Government during Lord Milner’s term of office, the proceeds of which loan he invested in speculation and lost owing to alleged unfair treatment on the part of the last-mentioned Government, praying for compensation.

from inhabitants of Mier, Gordonia, praying for telegraphic communication.

from Mhlangazo Faku, of Bizana, Eastern Pondoland, late Kafir Chief, praying that he be placed on the land which he inherited from the Paramount Chief Faku, at the Nthlenzi, from the Emgodini stream to the Nquabeni stream, in Eastern Pondoland, which lands were taken from him by the Government at the annexation of Pondoland, and be allowed to pay hut tax thereon; that he be no longer considered a political prisoner, and that he be recognised as a Pondo Chief with the salary and the full rights and rank of a Pondo Chief under the Union Government.

from A. R. van der Spuy, teacher.

from Jan Hendrik Gey, praying to be relieved as surety to Petrus van den Berg on a bond of £150 received out of the “Poor Burghers’ Fund.”

from inhabitants of Ladybrand, praying for the remission of arrear interest due on the loan in connection with the railway line from Ladybrand to Modderpoort.

from W. E. Verschuur, principal, Public School, Calitzdorp.

from the Native Congress of the Cape Province, which assembled in King William’s Town in January, 1912, against the trial by a jury of white persons in cases where natives are concerned.

from J. R. Bresler, discharged from the service of the Convict Department in April, 1912.

from inhabitants of Marico, praying to be allowed to sell alcoholic liquor, distilled by themselves from fruit, in wholesale quantities under a licence.

from Ada Wetton, late lady clerk in the Telephone Branch of the Post Office.

for the construction of a wagon bridge across the Vaal River at Roberts Drift, connecting Vrede and Standerton.

moved, as an unopposed motion, that Order of the Day No. 23, adjourned debate on motion on employment of white labour, and on curtailment of importation of alien labourers, to be resumed, be discharged.

seconded.

Agreed to.

as Chairman, brought up the first report of the Select Committee on Railways and Harbours, reporting the Railways and Harbours Service Bill with amendments.

It was ordered that the report and evidence be printed, and that the House go into committee on the Bill on Monday.

Return showing number of white and coloured men, Asiatics and Kafirs employed in the Forestry Department who are in receipt of 1s. to 5s. per day.

Papers in connection with the petition from the executive assistants (Cape Province), Post and Telegraph Department, for overtime to be calculated on a daily instead of on a weekly basis.

Return showing number and names of officers transferred from the Public Works Department, Cape Province, to the Public Works Department, Pretoria, etc.

asked the Minister of Native Affairs: (a) Whether it has been brought to his notice that certain natives have settled in the Moroko Territory, Orange Free State; and (b) whether he intends to have those natives removed, and to take such steps as will prevent natives from doing it again?

replied: The Government is advised that during the past eight years the only natives who have settled in the Moroko Territory, Thaba ’Nchu district, are a few native labourers, who originally came in search of employment, and a few Xosa Kafir families, who came up from Cathcart to Queen’s Town to rejoin their former masters, who had taken up land in the district. It is true that a considerable number of Basutos come into this district annually for the reaping seasons, but they return to Basutoland soon after the crops are harvested. No body of natives has settled in this district recently.

asked the Minister of Mines: (1) What number of cases of explosives were manufactured during the year 1911 at the respective dynamite factories in the Cape, Natal, and Transvaal Provinces; and (2) what were the number of white and coloured persons employed at each of the works?

replied: (1) 427,538 cases of explosives were manufactured during the year 1911 in the Cape Province, 208,627 in Natal, and 256,627 in the Transvaal Province; (2) 397 white persons and 575 coloured persons were employed at the works in the Cape Province during the year 1911; 239 whites and 810 coloured persons in Natal; and 255 whites and 639 coloured persons in the Transvaal.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether, in the interests of public health, safety, and morality, the Government will take into consideration the advisability of introducing legislation providing for the efficient control of bioscope exhibitions, including a censorship of the films proposed to be exhibited?

replied: With the pressure of business in this House it does not appear possible to introduce legislation of this nature into the Union Parliament, and the question will have to be considered whether provision should not be made in Provincial Ordinances to give powers to local authorities in regard to the control of bioscope exhibitions.

asked the Minister of Finance whether Act No. 26 of 1911, which amended Act No. 38 of 1905 of the Province of Natal in certain respects, applies after December 31, 1912, and, if not, what steps the Government intend to take to do away with the collection of the poll tax after that date?

Act No. 26 of 1911 is only of effect in regard to the tax collectable in the year 1912, and does not apply after December 31 next. I need not remind the hon. member that the passing of Act No. 26 of 1911 was only a tentative step intended to suspend a particularly objectionable method of raising revenue until Parliament could give consideration to taxation proposals of a general and less objectionable character, which would include provision for restoring the loss of revenue suffered by the Treasury in consequence of the suspension of this tax. These general proposals will be submitted to Parliament at the commencement of next session, and it does not seem to be necessary or desirable to take any further steps in the meantime.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Whether he is aware that the cost of sidings in Natal has been increased to about three times that prevailing before Union; and (2) whether the matter has been considered by the Railway Board, and, if so, with what result?

(1) Yes; but conditions now and prior to Union are so dissimilar that it is misleading to make general comparisons of this kind, e.g., material, which forms by far the greater proportion of total cost, was, prior to Union, supplied by Natal Administration, but it is now paid for by and remains the property of applicants. (2) Answer to first part of question is in negative, and second part of question therefore falls to the ground. General question of cost of constructing private sidings is, however, engaging attention of Administration and Railway Board.

asked the Minister of Mines when the Government intends to proclaim Graskop, near the Pilgrim’s Rest gold-fields, a township?

replied: The matter is now before the Townships Board for consideration.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether it is a fact that the Government leased to the Natal Creamery, at Mooi River, the Volksrust State Creamery for a number of years; and if so, in view of the fact that the Natal Creamery imported last year to Mooi River foreign butter in bulk which they re-packed and distributed to the public as the produce of South Africa, what precaution the Government proposes to take to prevent the Natal Creamery, as lessees of the Volksrust State Creamery, from bringing in future imported butter to Volksrust and distributing it from the State Creamery to the public as South African-made fresh butter?

by the Minister of Commerce and Industries, that some Australian butter had been imported by the Mooi River Creamery Co. and sold by them, though I did not gather from the reply that the butter was sold by the creamery as South African produce. Steps are being taken to prevent butter being imported from Australia by the creamery at Standerton and sold as South African produce.

Arising out of the reply, may I ask if it is the intention of the Government to take action against this company for fraud. They have admitted their guilt by—

The hon. member give notice.

asked the Minister of the Interior: (1) Whether it is the case that officers have recently been retrenched from the service who, under section 23 (2) of Act 19 of 1908 (Transvaal), were entitled to continue in the service until they had completed ten years’ service, so long as in the opinion of the Minister they were fit and capable of properly discharging the duties of their offices; (2) if so, what were the grounds of such retrenchment, and how have such officers been dealt with who have been retrenched before completing ten years’ service; and (3) whether he considers that he is free to retrench such officers before they have served ten years, notwithstanding the provisions of the Act above quoted?

replied: I do not know to what particular cases the hon. member refers; but recent retrenchments have been made on the ground of re-organisation and abolition of offices. Under the provisions of the law quoted by the hon. member, officers are entitled to remain in the public service for ten years, provided, of course, that their offices continue in existence.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether it is a fact that at the Volunteer Easter camps the members of all corps are receiving pay with the exception of the Cape Province corps?

replied: It is not the case that Volunteer corps in the Cape Province are the only corps which do not receive pay while attending Easter camp. Though members of Cape Volunteer corps do not receive pay, they receive an allowance of 2s. 6d. a day for rations, etc., and 1s. 6d. a day for forage while attending camp. In the Transvaal no pay is given, but a ration allowance of 1s. 6d. a day and a forage allowance of 1s. 6d. In Natal no ration or forage allowances are given, but each man receives pay at the rate of 5s. a day, from which he pays for his own rations and forage. These arrangements merely continue the practice in the several Colonies before Union, and it has not been thought advisable to disturb them pending re-organisation.

asked the Minister of Native Affairs whether it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Electoral Bill this session; and whether, in the event of the Government determining by the end of the present month not to proceed further with it, he will move for its discharge so that a motion in favour of women suffrage may be discussed by the House?

said the Government did intend to proceed with the Bill if the state of business allowed. He was not in a position to answer the second question.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether he has received a communication from the University Council referring to the Public Service and Pensions Bill, and the method of recruiting for the Civil Service; and, if so, whether he will without delay lay it on the table of the House?

replied: Yes; I have received such a communication, and will lay it on the table of the House.

moved for leave to introduce the Bill.

seconded.

asked if the Government was bringing forward these measures for the purpose of loading the paper? They had a list of Bills that had been introduced into that House. Some were introduced in January shortly after the House met, and they had hardly got any further forward with some of them. The other day he asked the Prime Minister to make a statement on the subject in the interests of hon. members on both sides of the House, and the Prime Minister said that if time permitted they would deal with the Bills that were before the House. Since then several other Bills had been introduced, while the Minister of Justice said that the Police Bill would be introduced.

was understood to say that the hon. member should introduce the matter before ’business began.

said that what he wanted to know was whether the Government intended going on with all these measures. (Hear, hear.) If the Government were not going on it was simply wasting the time of the House to ask for leave for the introduction of these measures.

suggested that the hon. member might ask the Government to make a statement on the following day.

said he wished to know the position of hon. members who would not be in favour of adopting the motion before the House if they were not clear on the point as to whether the Government intended to proceed with the Bill.

said he would allow the hon. member to ask the Government.

said that the Public Accounts Committee passed a resolution last year, and the Government appointed a Commission, which had reported. This Bill was based on the report. The Government recognised that this was a contentious measure and that there was grave doubt about it getting through this session. But it was hoped that if the second reading could be taken and the Bill could be sent to a Select Committee that perhaps there would be an opportunity of carrying it this session. (Hear, hear.)

Leave was granted, the Bill read a first time, and the second reading set down for Monday next.

asked if there was anything new about the University matter? Was there anything further from the Trustees?

No, sir, I have got no further news.

moved that this House is of opinion that the Government should, during the present session, introduce legislation prohibiting the loading and unloading of vessels within the harbours of the Union on Sundays, except in cases where delay would endanger the cargo, the vessel or human lives. The mover said that since Parliament had met he had paid many visits to the Cape Town Docks, and had come to the conclusion that in the loading and unloading of ships little account was taken of Sunday. From information which he had received, it had not appeared that such Sunday work was necessary. There were no regulations in existence to forbid that Sunday work. He would be told that the Government had appointed a Commission to inquire into the Sunday question, which was still sitting. But that Commission would not be able to report during the present session, and that was why he had introduced the motion. He belonged to those persons who regarded it as their duty to protect the principles and the traditions of the public whom they represented. He did not know how the matter stood in other harbours, but in that at Cape Town no difference was made between Sunday and any other day. Provided the owners gave due notice on Saturday of their intention to load or unload on Sunday, that work was done, and it continued sometimes from Sunday morning right through till Monday. Both the workmen and the clerks got extra pay for their work, but should they refuse to do it they would be dismissed. Some of those persons would doubtless prefer to have a day of rest and to go to church. The Government were obliged to deliver coal to the ships at 2s. per ton, whether on Sunday or any other day. If the ships unloaded coal on Sunday they had to pay the extra cost, but when it was loaded on that day the Government had to pay. He did not intend that perishable goods should be prohibited from being loaded or unloaded on Sundays, or that passengers should be prevented from landing. As an example of what was going on, he would point out that during January last work took place on four Sundays by respectively 48, 120, 166, and 92 workmen and 55, 15, 22, and 25 clerks, altogether 525 persons. Would the Minister explain why all that Sunday work was necessary?

seconded the motion. He said that God had appointed the Sabbath, which had existed from the beginning of the world. It had not been fixed by man. It ought to be respected, and no one had a right to abolish it. Whoever violated the Sabbath ought to be punished. The public were entirely opposed to Sunday work unless it was absolutely necessary, and a Government which failed to preserve the Sunday would certainly perish.

supported the motion, and said it was possibly the only opportunity they would have during the present session to discuss the subject. The Government had appointed a Commission to deal with the Sunday question, which had obtained evidence in regard to the work at the ports. The Minister of the Interior promised last year that the Commission would report during the present year, and that the laws relating to the Sabbath would be considered. He (the speaker) had in consequence of that promise supported the passing of the Mines and Works Acts. Why, he asked, had the Minister waited so long before appointing the Commission? There was now no chance of dealing with the question during the present session. If a Bill were not brought forward in the following session, he would be obliged to introduce a motion dealing with the subject. Sunday work was opposed to the Christian principles of the people. They were dissatisfied with the Minister of Defence for allowing military drills and sham fights to take place in the Transvaal on Sundays, which were a scandal in a Christian country.

said that he had always been opposed to working on Sunday whenever it could possibly be avoided, and he sympathised with this motion, and was in favour of Sunday observance being carried out to a certain point, but he urged that it would be a great mistake to Lay down a hard and fast rule as regarded shipping. He referred to the great difficulties which would be caused on the coast if any such hard and fast rule were laid down.

said he was sorry this motion had been brought forward.

Why?

said that they were not there to defend, still less to attack, any special religion. Hon. members had contended for this motion on the ground of what they called the Christian religion.

No, it is not.

said that the motion was contrary, first of all, to common-sense, was opposed to all the history of the Church, and certainly was opposed to the teaching of the New Testament. He was as much in favour of one day’s rest or two days’ rest in seven, whichever could be managed, as anybody, but they had been told just now by the hon. member for Vrededorp that, because they were a Christian people, unloading boats on Sundays was a scandal. Why, they were not even decent heathen. (Laughter.) If they were going to carry out that principle, why should they not ask the Imperial Government to send a few ships of war here, and stop the ships that, were passing our shores on Sundays? This motion was not based on a principle; it was based on a fallacy. That which was right on Sunday could not be wrong on Monday, or vice versa. After all, they had to remember that the so-called Christian people were only a portion—and a very small portion—of this community.

said he would remind the last speaker that this was a Christian Parliament. (Hear, hear.) He very much sympathised with the principles underlying the proposal which had been moved on the other side of the House that this Parliament should endeavour, he would not say to prohibit, but to legislate in such a way that there should be the least possible work, and certainly no unnecessary work should be done on the day which they kept as the Lord’s Day and as the day of rest. There were some difficulties in the way, and the debate which arose last session resulted in the establishment of a Commission. That Commission was now taking evidence, which would be laid before the House in due course. He did not think it was wise under these circumstances to single out any particular industry at the present time for attack. He thought the hon. member would be well advised to withdraw his motion until the report of the Commission had been brought up.

said the speech which had been delivered by the hon. member for Roodepoort inclined him to call out: “God preserve this country from such legislators.” It should not be forgotten that England had grown great because it remained faithful to the principles of religion. South Africa was a Christian country. Their forefathers came here as Huguenots with the Bible under their arms, and it was fitting that their descendants should also be Christians. He was heartily in favour of the motion. They must hold fast to their principles, for when they once began to make exceptions there was no knowing where it would end. He feared the Commission would not be able to report during the present session, but he wanted to point out that they required to have that report in order to discuss it, and to deal with the laws relating to the subject. No doubt a good deal of work had to be done on Sundays, but it was equally true that much other work might well be left undone. Once Sunday work was allowed, it became a custom, and in course of time it would become impossible to stop it.

said he had no particular sympathy with any particular day of the week being held more sacred than the other. At the same time he was strongly of opinion that one day in the week should be set apart as a day of rest—a day where people could lead their own lives away entirely from the atmosphere of daily labour. Whether they should leave the motion till the report of the Sunday Observance Commission he was not prepared to say, although he was certainly in favour of supporting the principle of having no unnecessary work done upon one day of the week. He did not know, however, if hon. members upon their farms would agree to cease work one day in seven, and the same excuse that they would make might as easily be used by ship owners and merchants, as had been done by the mine owners, when it was proposed to close the mills on Sundays. There was very little sympathy shown to the mine workers on the Rand by farmers on the land, when they wanted this prohibition. In his opinion, if they wanted to stop unnecessary work on Sundays all they had to do was to compel the employer to pay very heavily for it; if they wanted their ships unloaded on Sundays, let them pay double dues, then the question would be asked by those most interested, would it pay them to pay these double dues. He would move the following amendment, to add at the end, “when the workmen so engaged are paid not less than double the usual rate.”

seconded the amendment.

said he would like to move a further amendment, to omit all the words after “opinion that,” and to substitute, “the Railways and Harbours Department shall discourage as far as practicable any work on Sundays in the ports of the Union.” He was on the Table Bay Harbour Board for four years, and it was certainly never the wish of the Board to have work done on Sundays. It was not the desire of the Department to have Sunday work and that was only done when it was compulsory. For instance, steamers ran to a time-table and often it was necessary that they should take in coal on Sundays. It was only urgent work that was carried out on Sundays. He did not think it was the wish of the Department to have Sunday work. At the same time it was not practicable to have legislation to stop it, because urgent cases arose.

seconded the further amendment.

said he belonged to those people who were unable to jest on such a matter as that. He accordingly supported the motion, though it seemed to him it came a little late. Last year they had agreed to Sunday labour in the mines, when dealing with the Mines and Works Bill. That was done in the hope that the Sunday law would be considered during the course of the present session. He (the speaker) had known better. He had voted against the relative clause in the Bill last year, and felt sure that the Sunday law would not be dealt with even next year. Talking helped nothing unless they recognised the Creator.

said he expected, after one or two members had spoken, that the Minister would have given the motion its quietus. They had often been reminded that there was a waste of time in the House, and that discussion certainly was a waste of time. The motion was not practicable. It was impossible in all cases to stop the working of ships on Sundays. Sometimes ships were compelled to conic into harbour on Sunday mornings and to leave as soon as possible the same day. At Durban the question of Sunday work was left to the Collector of Customs, who had power to permit Sunday work when necessary. Extra wages having to be paid on Sundays, it was not to the advantage of the shipping people to have Sunday work if it could be avoided. It would only be logical that the words “and railways” should be added to the motion. (Hear, hear, and an HON. MEMBER:: “And trams.”) The best plan would be to let the matter drop, and withdraw the motion

said it was a very complicated question, and yet they were bound to do their best to see the Sabbath generally respected. The hon. member for Roodepoort had said that every religion had its own Sunday. In South Africa no one was forbidden to celebrate his own Sunday, but the Sunday referred to here was the Sunday of the vast majority of the Christian population. Too much work was being done on Sundays, and legislation was required to limit such work to what was necessary. The amendment moved by the hon. member for Georgetown would only lead to more of it, as the double payment would make Sunday work more attractive. They should have a law which forbade that work on Sundays.

said the mover of the motion deserved the thanks of the House. There had been many mocking references to the subject, and hon. members who had made them should be filled with shame. The Sunday Observance Commission was still sitting, but if the House expressed its opinion on the subject it would strengthen the hands of that Commission. Those who were indifferent on that subject should reflect for a moment what would become of the people if Sunday were abolished. The Labour party asked for one day’s rest in every seven, and it was with them a question of money, for if only their members were sufficiently paid they were willing to work on Sundays. The hon. member for Roodepoort was like the spider who sucked poison from a flower. If a prize were offered for the member who’ talked the greatest nonsense the hon. member in Question would win it. With the farmers the Sabbath was properly honoured, not only by the employers, but also by all their servants being freed from all unnecessary work. It ought to be forbidden to do all unnecessary work on Sunday, and he was sorry that the double charge for Sunday telegrams had been abolished. Public meetings on Sundays ought to be forbidden. At Johannesburg a sham fight had been held on Easter Sunday, notwithstanding the views that had been expressed in that House during the last session. Anybody who did not obtain one day of rest in the week would afterwards have to suffer from weakness caused the incessant work.

instanced what had happened at Algoa Bay, where, owing to rough weather, the mail boat could not discharge cargo into lighters on Friday, and could only be worked on Saturday afternoon and Sunday, and the men had to be paid for four days—and double rates on the Sunday. He thought that the attitude of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, was right, and he (the speaker) would support him.

said he thought that the hon. gentleman who moved the motion had gone too far. He cited the case of the mail steamer which arrived at Mossel Bay. They could hardly expect the mail steamer to wait 24 hours in order to land passengers. They might as well ask the railway authorities to bring the mail train to Johannesburg to a standstill from midnight on Saturday to midnight on Sunday.

applauded the motion. When they were discussing the Mines and Works Bill last year, he said the Sunday labour question was discussed, and hon. members were asked to allow it to pass. A Commission was to be appointed, so they were told, which would report during the present session, upon which the whole Sunday law would come up for consideration. It appeared to him that they had been somewhat played with. There was no report before them, and the Bill would certainly not come up for discussion. They got mockery from the hon. member for Roodepoort, and so far as the hon. member for Georgetown was concerned, it was a question of money. He (the speaker) would support the motion of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, as he was not one of those who wanted a cast-iron law forbidding all Sunday work. Necessary work would still have to be done, even on the farms. The debate might tend to expedite the production of the Commission’s report.

said there was little difference of opinion on this question, though the amendment of the hon. member for Georgetown appeared to him to be inexplicable. If the hon. member thought that Sunday work was bad, then it could not be made good by being paid double wages. If he did not think Sunday work was wrong, why then did he introduce his amendment? There was much to be said in favour of the motion of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central. It was, however, impracticable to speak only of harbours and railways. They ought to include all industries which were carried on Sundays. He (the speaker) hoped that during the following year the Minister would deal with labour of all sorts, and not confine himself to that in harbours or on railways. It was impracticable to deal now by motion with two branches of industry, and to deal afterwards with the others.

said he was sorry that the hon. member for Pretoria East was not in his place. If that hon. gentleman had a friend, he hoped he would go and fetch him, because he would like to have a word with him. (Laughter.) Then the hon. member for Langlaagte was not in his place—(laughter)—and he hoped some friend would fetch him. (Laughter.) The hon. member for Langlaagte, when they were discussing the physical condition of the men of South Africa, was prepared not only to weep salt tears, but tears of blood. But when they discussed something better than the physical welfare of these men, he was not in his place. The hon. member for Georgetown thought it was all right provided they paid the men extra.

He doesn’t.

He said so, anyhow. He listened last session to the speech of the hon. member for Vrededorp (Mr. L. Geldenhuys), and was very much surprised at the sentiments he had expressed to-day. He rather thought that the distance of the sea from Vrededorp had some influence with him. When it was a question of harbours it did not matter whether they worked on Sundays or not, but when it came to the working of stamps it was a sin. He agreed that there should be a due observance of the Sabbath, and the reasonable suggestion made by the hon. member for Cape Town, Central (Mr. J. W. Jagger), was one which he thought they might well follow. It was impossible, of course, to stop all work on Sundays, and he would more particularly, in making that point, address himself to hon. members on his side of the House. There was a feeling in this country, and a feeling that they ought to respect, that the Sabbath was to be properly observed; but if that was so the only way to obtain that observance was by tolerance. Unless they were prepared to be tolerant, the position they wished to establish would be impossible. He would like to point out that endeavours to enforce such religious observances in the past had always ended disastrously. There was certainly, throughout the country, a strong feeling, and they must respect it, and he thought they could do that best by adopting the motion of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central (Mr. J. W. Jagger).

considered the motion was one of the first importance, which every hon. member would support. Some thought it was a subject for amusement, and others that all work on Sundays should be forbidden. That was not the intention of the motion. All that was asked for in this motion was that unnecessary work should be prohibited. He was astonished at some of the remarks which had been made by hon. members on the cross-benches. Those members were the fewest in number, and should seek their help in the Lord. He (the speaker) had always doubted somewhat as to the objects of the Labour party, but it now appeared that the chief point in their view was money. Given a high wage, then it mattered little whether Sunday were honoured or not. He would support the amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central. The loading of ships on Sunday might very well wait till Monday.

deplored the mocking speech which they had heard from the hon. member for Ladybrand. Last year he (the speaker), not only wanted to stop the mines from milling quartz on Sundays, but urged that the whole Sunday question should be dealt with forthwith. Seeing that the latter course was impossible at the time he had voted for the Mines and Works Bill. The hon. members for Ficksburg and Prieska had spoken about adhering to principles, and had voted last year for the amendment which forbade the crushing of quartz on Sundays on and after the 1st January, 1914. He (the speaker) had voted for the motion of the Minister, whereby it was made possible to deal with the whole question of Sunday labour. It was clear from the amendment moved by the hon. member for Georgetown that the Labour party wanted to earn big wages. They wanted to sell the Sunday. The present motion would help to wake up the Minister of the Interior.

supported the motion of the hon. member for Standerton, though he doubted whether it would do any good to accept it at present. The Commission was still busy with its work, and it was therefore impossible to discuss what they should recommend. If that motion were agreed to, the Government would be obliged to bring in a Bill dealing only with Sunday work in the harbours and on the railways, and that was not desirable. The Labour party were reproaching them with having voted last year against the amendment of the hon. member for Jeppe. Like all the other accusations coming from that party, the reproach was unjust and wrong. Even if the Government were prepared to bring up a Bill, it would be impossible to deal with it during the present session. He deeply regretted the remarks which had fallen from the hon. member for Roodepoort, who seemed to be chiefly interested in addressing public meetings on Sunday evenings, and advancing theories opposed to the interests of the public. The hon. member for Ladybrand made it appear as if members wanted to Christianise the people by means of Sunday legislation, but what they really wanted was to give every working man a day of rest. When the employer was unwilling to allow that, then the legislator must step in, and if necessary use force. If they insisted on Sunday work they should quadruple the pay. That would act as a deterrent. He would leave to the judgment of the House the speech which had been made by the hon. member for Roodepoort.

could not understand the statement that the report of the Commission would never be dealt with. The Government had promised last year to appoint a Commission, and they had kept their promise. It was not advisable to deal with the Sunday question piecemeal, but the law as a whole should be discussed. He had been astonished at the amount of work which was done on Sundays at the Cape. When they heard the hon. member for Prieska speak they would hardly think he had sat so long in the Cape Parliament. They should not coniine themselves to legislation, but also give a good example. Hon. members who spoke so strongly last year against Sunday work in the mines were now to be seen going out by the Sunday morning trains into the country instead of going to church. He hoped the hon. member for Standerton would withdraw his motion.

thought it would be difficult to bring up a Bill dealing with Sunday work in the harbours only. It was impossible to stop all Sunday work, and the whole question was a most difficult one. The Christian religion was against such work, and they must do all they possibly could to get the Sabbath recognised. Trams and trains were bound to run on Sundays. ’

said the feeling in the old Cape House was, as he was sure it was the feeling in that House, that as little work as possible should be done on Sundays. There was a large body of men in that House, and a very large body of the public, which regarded work on Sundays with real and sincere regret. (Cheers.) There was another section which held the view that there should be one day’s rest in seven, some thought for religious purposes almost exclusively, and others as a day of rest in the sense that there should be no labour on that day. What was the real wish was that as little work as possible should be done on Sundays. The whole question was, “What is ‘ necessary work?” That was the only point of difficulty. All must admit that a certain amount of work must be done at the harbours on Sundays. They could not say to passengers, “You must not disembark on Sundays,” and if the passengers did land on Sundays they must allow them to take their baggage with them. Therefore he regarded that sort of work as necessary. Then they had ships calling for coal. They could not say to the ship-owners, whose ships must reach their destination at certain dates, that they would not be supplied with coal on Sundays. Under the Cape and Natal laws ships were not allowed to discharge cargo on Sundays unless by special consent of the Chief Customs Officer. Quite recently the Table Bay Harbour Advisory Board expressed the wish that the law with regard to the unloading of ships on Sundays should be observed, and the officials did not allow any Sunday work which they did not think was necessary. But there was a difference of opinion as to what was necessary and what was not. It was impossible to pass a law and say that there should be no work on Sundays at all. With regard to the railways, some time ago a deputation waited on him in the Transvaal, the deputation consisting of clergymen representing different denominations. He then said that they would not do more work on Sundays on the railways than was necessary, although a certain amount must be done. Of course, to one who did not know all the circumstances it would seem that a good deal of railway work was done on Sundays that was not necessary. In many places the department had discontinued starting trains on Sundays, but, of course, many trains had to run on Sundays. However, there was no necessity for further legislation, and therefore he hoped the motion would be withdrawn. There were other reasons against the motion just now, because it would be difficult to get legislation through this session, and it would not be advisable to deal with the matter piecemeal.

said that no speaker had been able to show that the loading or unloading of ships on Sundays was necessary. He did not ask anything that was impossible. When the question was discussed last year he saw at once that it would be unjust suddenly to forbid Sunday work on the mines. But Sunday work in the harbours was only done in the interest of the ship owner who wanted to make money. He deplored the speech which had been delivered by the hon. member for Roodepoort, but from a member who spoke at street corners on political subjects on Sundays they could not expect anything else. The speaker could not accept the amendment of the hon. member for Georgetown because he had no right to sell the Sabbath. As soon as his (the speaker’s) motion had appeared in the newspapers, instructions were given that ships were no longer to be loaded or unloaded on Sundays, though passengers might land, and cargo of a perishable nature be unloaded. Why were those instructions not given before? They could manage without Sunday work in the harbours in other countries, and they could do the same here. He could not accept the amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, as the words “as far as possible” were too vague. He withdrew his motion.

Both the amendments and the original motion were withdrawn.

moved for a return giving full details of the average monthly expenditure of the messenger of the Court at Boksburg during the past six months.

seconded.

moved as an amendment to make “messenger” and “Court” in the plural, and after “Boksburg” to insert “and Johannesburg.”

seconded the amendment.

Agreed to.

The motion, as amended, was agreed to.

moved that the petition of J. H. Grobler and 1,799 others, inhabitants of the towns and districts of Jansenville, Pearston and Somerset East, praying for railway connection between Klipplaat and Somerset East, presented to the House on the 8th March, 1912, be referred to the Government for inquiry and report.

He said that this was a line that would tap the important South-Western districts of the Province. He would like to point out to the House that this matter had been before the House on a previous occasion 1890, when Sir Gordon Sprigg was the Prime Minister. It was introduced in the form of a motion by the Government that the House go into committee to grant leave to raise loans for the purpose of carrying out certain railways among which was the line he was now concerned with. It seemed to be treated as a motion of no confidence at that time, for the scheme did not go through. At that time there seemed to be a great move on for railway expansion. A big scheme was brought in by Sir Jno Molteno for 849 miles of railway which added to the debt of the Colony by £7,000,000. The second big scheme was brought in by Sir Thos. Scanlen to add 960 miles; and this third scheme would have added 900 miles to the railways at a cost of £7,000,000. The opposition was so strong to the last scheme that the Government was turned out of office. Although the scheme was abandoned for a time, section by section the line had been built, with the exception of the piece he was now asking for. This particular portion of the community had waited patiently for twenty-two years and he honestly craved the sincere and honest support of his hon. friend (the Minister of Railways and Harbours) in making a commencement on this line. He was sorry that the hon. member for Victoria West (Mr. J. X. Merriman) was not in his seat, because he was one of the strongest opposers of the scheme at that time. He took up the standpoint that the Government was not at that time in a position to borrow the necessary amount of money. One reason was that their revenues were derived almost exclusively from the Customs and the revenue they got from acting as public carriers. He gave the Attorney-General at that time three reasons, and added that though it was often said that the poor were always with us, but that they always had the natives with them. He gave these reasons for not carrying on the scheme, but they no longer held water. The natives were not a danger. Proceeding, he said that there were no spare animals for transport in that part at present. In every place where no railways existed animals were used for transport to the detriment of agriculture. He had before him a circular issued by the General Manager of Railways in which the lines were graded as to mileage and expenditure. In that circular it was stated that a certain line would be a failure, whereas as a fact it now made a profit of £4,553 a year. That showed how things had changed. The hon. member went on to allude to the references recently made by the right hon. the member for Victoria West (Mr. Merriman) to the great development along the Sundays River. This development, he said, would not have been possible, unless the railways had been carried through a good part of the district. He pointed out the desirability of encouraging places which had a larger European population than coloured population, and showed that the districts which would be served by the suggested railway stood well in this respect. He went on to speak of the waste of material caused through the lack of facilities for utilising that material in a commercial way, and he dwelled on the importance of a thorough system of railway communication for bringing about an improvement in this direction. As he said, this Klipplaat and Somerset East line would be of very great advantage in promoting the exchange of produce. It would be of great value also as a through line. Perhaps it might be said that he would not get support because it was not a political line, but he hoped it would be looked at as a line solely for the benefit of the country. This line, he had been told, was looked at in the light of a “hardy annual,” and he would continue to keep it like that until he got redress.

seconded the motion. He remembered that when he was a child the question of constructing he line was discussed, and since then it had been before Parliament every year. Since that time he had to give his vote for railway lines in other districts, but the Klipplaat-Somerset East line was not laid. The various Ministers of Railways during the last twenty-five years had all admitted the necessity of that line, but its construction was always postponed. It was not a branch line, but would connect two main lines, and bring East London and Cape Town in direct communication. At present the inhabitants of the Eastern Province were obliged when going to Cape Town to go first to De Aar. The proposed line would enable farmers in the Eastern Province to find a good market at the Cape. The hon. member for Cape Town, Central, had always opposed the building of more railways, but if the proposed line were constructed, they would see some of the fattest weathers in Cape Town possible. The present freight of 6s. 8d. per head was prohibitive. He expected that the motion would be treated with sympathy, and that its acceptance by the House would make an impression on the Minister of Railways and Harbours. The districts which would be served by the line were amongst the best in the Cape, and the time had now come when they should receive more attention. The plea of lack of money, which had always hitherto been brought against them, could no longer apply, as the Minister of Finance had recently received £300,000 on which he had not calculated. Every year the Minister of Railways paid large sums into the Treasury, and he should retain a sufficient sum of money to build the line in question.

said he thought every hon. member ought to support the motion. Last session several petitions were received from the Montagu and Ladismith districts asking for railway connection from some point on the main line joining up those two places. A line from Klipplaat to Somerset East would be a connecting link between east and west. Not only would it be the shortest line between east and west, but the connecting link of a huge developing line running through the cream of the Union. It would also be the shortest line to the interior. He hoped that the Minister was not only going to tell them that he was going to accept the motion, but that he was going to take into earnest consideration the building of the line as soon as possible.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that all correspondence relating to the embossing of cheque, draft, and other forms, which has taken place between the Inland Revenue Department in Pretoria and the Inland Revenue Department in Cape Town, and with banking and other institutions, together with all relative papers and memoranda, be laid upon the table of the House.

seconded.

said that if he were to tell his hon. friend what had taken place in regard to this matter, he thought his hon. friend would see fit to withdraw the motion. He knew the object of his hon. friend; he had been dreadfully concerned about this matter. He got alarmed at anything that happened. Recently he drew attention to the case of a bank which was having its cheques embossed at Pretoria, and he jumped to the conclusion that the Government intended to transfer this stamping business to Pretoria. He wanted to assure his hon. friend that this was not the intention of the Government. The Government recognised that every facility should be granted to the commercial public in all the big centres of South Africa. In view of the notoriety which had been given this matter in Parliament and the Press, this one bank had written to the Treasury asking that the arrangement by which their cheques should be embossed at Pretoria should be cancelled. Of course, the Treasury was not anxious to do more than was absolutely necessary. This one bank was the Bank of Africa, and the Minister proceeded to read the short correspondence which had taken place between the Treasury and the general manager of the bank so far as the cancellation of the system was concerned. The Minister wrote in reply to the bank’s letter stating that he accepted the offer made by the bank, and that from the 1st prox. the Bank of Africa would revert to the former system. The alarm of his hon. friend had been needless, and he hoped that nothing further would be heard of the matter. It was not more than a matter of five “bob” one way or the other.

What about paying the carriage?

said that the hon. member had alleged that this meant the gradual transference of the work to Pretoria.

The Minister has made a fuss about one bank—

What? I made the fuss?

Yes. Continuing, he said the country was beginning to find that there were two Governments in power—the Government on the Treasury benches and the Government composed of officials, who did a lot of things about which Ministers were ignorant. That was one of the results of excessive centralization. The point he made was this: The Government had a system by which any cheque-books that might be stamped at Pretoria were sent to their destinations carriage paid. The Minister would not deny that. Now that privilege was not given to any other centre. That was the point. That inducement would have the result of drifting all the work to Pretoria.

Why not?

The Minister said it was not the wish of the Government to transfer it. He did say that while this privilege existed there was a difference. The banks should pay the carriage on their cheques. He did not see how it was possible for him to withdraw his motion unless he got an assurance from the Minister that this particular privilege would be withdrawn.

There is no particular privilege accorded to Pretoria.

There must be. Proceeding, he said he understood that the regulation was still in force under which the Government paid the carriage on cheques sent to Pretoria.

What ever applies to Pretoria applies to Cape Town also.

Then I will put it in another form. If the cheque-books are stamped in Cape Town, are you prepared to pay the carriage from there to any place to which they might be sent?

Yes.

Then I will withdraw my motion.

The motion was withdrawn.

moved that the petition from H. H. Dickson and 374 others, inhabitants of the town of Jagersfontein, praying for the erection of a gaol at Jagersfontein, presented to the House on March 26, 1912, be referred to the Government for consideration. The mover said that last year he had handed in a petition asking for the removal of the prison at Jagersfontein, and in the Supplementary Estimates was an item covering the cost of its removal from the centre of the township to a spot which had been given gratis by the Jagersfontein Diamond Company. That ground was surveyed. Afterwards the speaker was informed that the Government intended to abolish the prison and to take all prisoners to Fauresmith. That was unjust to Jagersfontein, which was one of the most progressive towns in the Free State. The mine there had, amongst others, about 8,000 coloured people at work, and amongst those coloured people there were sometimes disturbances, and perhaps as many as fifty of the boys had to be placed in cells. The existing prison was too small for that, and so the Government desired to abolish it and remove the prisoners to Fauresmith. The desire expressed in the petition was that the prison at Jagersfontein be retained. The prisoners could be employed in the mine. It should not be forgotten that in point of population the town was the second largest in the Free State, and that last year the Government had drawn a revenue of £19,000 from Jagersfontein, which was more than that from any other town. He hoped, therefore, that the Government would retain the prison in Jagersfontein.

seconded the motion.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that the petitions from J. P. Bromber and 163 other residents of Kimberley, praying for legislation whereby the sale of intoxicating liquor to natives throughout the Union will be prohibited; and from E. M. de Vaal and 214 other residents of Kimberley, praying for legislation providing for the direct popular veto whereby men and women may decide by ballot on the continuance, reduction, or non-issue of liquor licences; presented to the House on March 1, 1912, be referred to the Government for consideration and report. He said it was not his intention that the Government should deal with liquor legislation this session, but that when they did consider some change they should bear in mind the different needs of different portions of the community.

who seconded the motion, read the text of the petition and said there was a growing feeling that there should be greater restrictions on the sale of liquor, and that there should be some direct popular veto. There would probably be a more suitable occasion for pressing the matter. He hoped that the motion would be passed.

supported the motion.

said he was happy to be in agreement with the hon. member for Tembuland. He certainly thought that in this matter something ought to be done, and they should inquire very earnestly as to how far the use of strong drink by natives should be allowed. It was for the Government to protect a people who were still children, and who lacked all sense of moderation in the use of strong drink. In the Cape the consumption of liquor was assuming very serious dimensions. In the Transvaal and Free State drunkenness amongst the Kafirs practically only occurred when they were supplied with it by conscienceless white persons. It was not his intention to injure wine dealers or wine farmers, but when they came to the Cape from the Free State, they looked with horror at the increasing volume of drunkenness among the coloured people. He supported the motion.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that the petition of J. Kroonin, of Robertson, a medical practitioner holding a Russian diploma, praying for permission to practice in the Cape Province, and presented to this House on the 5th of March, 1912, together with the petition of J. J. Rabie and 57 others, inhabitants of Luckhoff, Orange Free State, presented to this House on the 6th of March, 1912, and the petition of J. Zurnamen and 65 others, presented to this House on the 12th of March, 1912, in support thereof, be referred to the Government for consideration.

seconded.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that the petition from Louisa Prodehl, of Cape Town, mother of convict Herman Prodehl, of the Pretoria gaol, presented to this House on the 31st January,. 1912, be referred to the Government for consideration.

seconded.

The motion was agreed to.

moved for a return showing the names of persons refused admission into the Union since the 31st day of May, 1910, on the ground of being prohibited immigrants, the nations to which they belonged and whence they came, and the grounds on which admission was refused.

seconded.

suggested that the debate on this motion be adjourned till Wednesday.

This was agreed to.

moved that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the agreement entered into with Mr. Horace Wright for the sale and transport of scrap iron and working of iron ore; the committee to have power to take evidence and call for papers and to consist of seven members.

seconded.

could not see the necessity for appointing the Select Committee. The Government had given all possible information in connection with the matter, and he did not believe that the committee could spread more light on the subject. As he had more to say on the subject, he would suggest that the debate be adjourned.

said he would like to know whether it was the intention of the Government to support the amendment of the hon. member for Bosh of? He understood that the Government welcomed this inquiry.

said that he did not know why the hon. member for Boshof objected to this motion. The names of the committee had actually been agreed upon between the Ministers.

said that he had no reason whatever to block this motion. If it were, as he had no reason to doubt, that there had been an agreement on the subject, of which he must say he knew very little, he would take the hon. member’s word for it. (Hear, hear.)

said he would give notice of the names of the Select Committee.

The motion was agreed to.