from Kali Jacob Damane, lately native warder, Kokstad gaol.

from C. M. Fisher, late office-keeper, Customs Department.

Memorandum on scheme of retiring pensions, etc., provided for in the Public Service and Pensions Bill.

Report Postmaster-General 1911.

Draft regulations, Irrigation and Conservation of Waters Act, 1912; Memorandum of Agreement between the Union and the Rhodesia Railways Limited, relative to the first Railway Land Grant (Bechuanaland).

Papers relating to proposed lease to the Cradock School Board for Agricultural Industrial School of the farm Driefontein.

These papers were referred to the Select Committee on Waste Lands.

in moving the second reading, said that the object of the measure primarily was to give the settlers who had, under the Imperial Settlement Scheme, obtained ground in the Free State, an opportunity of acquiring the titles to the land which they had possessed and had improved. (Hear, hear.) As the lawnow stood, title could only be issued after a term of 30 years from the grant of the original licence to occupy, and upon fulfilment of all the conditions. A desire, however, had been expressed to facilitate the transfer, the Government being amply secured for what was due to it by the settlers, and there was no reason that the Government could see why that desire of the settlers should not be granted. (Cheers.) The first matter from the business point of view, was the matter of security. In that respect the fullest investigation had been made in the Free State, and he felt assured that the security was ample. The object was simply to anticipate the time at which settlers could get title.

The benefit to the settlers was quite clear. Once this Bill was passed they would feel masters of their own farms for which they had paid. He was quite convinced that they had improved the properties to a large extent. In regard to the Transvaal the position was not quite the same, so that in the Bill, instead of saying it “shall” be done, it said in regard to that Province it “may” be done, because the Government was not sure of full security in all cases, and they would have to exercise their discretion and discriminate. Hon. members who had studied the Imperial Land Settlement Ordinance would know that there was a very extensive scheme of supervision. There was a whole department devoted to the settlers, and it was an expensive department. The expenditure amounted to something like £9,000 a year. That expenditure, or almost the whole of that expenditure, however, would be spared to the Government by adopting the principle of this Bill in giving the settlers title. The Government were granting the settlers what they desired, and was doing that without any loss to itself. As a matter of fact, there would be a saving of approximately £9,000 per annum. As to the Transvaal, the position would be to a great extent the same in this connection. This Bill, when passed, would mean the liquidation of the Imperial land settlement scheme in the Transvaal and in the Free State. The settlers would come under the general law, and they would all feel that they belonged to one family, and there was not that feeling at present. He thought the Government were arriving at a satisfactory solution of the difficulty in regard to the position of settlers under the Imperial Ordinance and the other settlers.

thought the Bill would be welcomed by all sides. In clause 2, however, settlers in the Transvaal were handicapped in comparison with the Free State. In the Transvaal the settler must pay his instalments, as was the case at present, whereas in the Free State he could pay the whole amount at once if he wished. The Transvaal settler could not do that, but had to pay instalments every half-year. There were also discrepancies in regard to obtaining title, and he hoped the Minister would alter this state of affairs. Under Union all settlers should receive uniform treatment. It further appeared to him that in the Transvaal those who obtained land under Responsible Government would not fall under the Bill. That should be altered. In other respects he heartily welcomed this Bill.

said that there were a large number of settlers in the district which he represented, and he wished to express gratitude to the Government for having made this concession to these people. He had hoped that the Government might have seen their way to reduce the price, but it seemed that they were unable to meet them in that respect. On behalf of those in his district he wished to express his gratitude and also to support the suggestion of the hon. member for Rustenburg that the settlers in the Transvaal would be put upon the same footing as those in the Free State.

was pleased to see that the Government was prepared to grant the settlers title on the land occupied by them. Many settlers had left the country because they could not get title. He regretted, however, that the Minister reserved his discretion to give or refuse title, in the Transvaal. This apparently was due to the fact that in many cases the instalments due exceeded the value of the ground. But the bond would be passed with the so-called “general clause,’ so that all properties could be reckoned to be security. He pointed to the law of 1904, under which settlers could obtain title, if the Minister was satisfied that the improvements were worth as much as the amount due on the ground. In 1907, Mr. Rissik had amended that law to the benefit of the settlers, but the present Minister of Lands did not take the same view, and wished to keep the whole power in his own hands. That should not be allowed. He also urged that the settlers who had worked their holdings ever since 1886 should be granted title. They now owned under a Government servitude.

welcomed the Bill, which would be hailed with delight by the Free State, and would do away with a feeling of unrest on the part of widows and children of settlers, who would now be able to become proprietors of the land.

said everybody who wished well to these settlers would deprecate discussion on this measure at this late stage of the session, but he wished to say, as one interested in these settlements in one part of the country, that he was very glad to see that the Government had introduced this Bill. As some hon. members knew, the care of these settlers, in the first instance, was committed to a Board, and that Board was not under the Ministry for the time being. It was thought desirable to continue a certain measure of protection to them when Responsible Government was granted, and, as far as his knowledge went, the Responsible Governments of these colonies had done everything in their power to treat these settlers in a spirit of absolute fairness. It was their desire to treat them as citizens who desired to settle in the country, without drawing any invidious distinctions between them and others. The hon. member (proceeding) called attention to a difference in the terms of redemption of the bonds between the Free State settlers and those in the Transvaal, whereby the latter had not the opportunity of paying up the capital, as provided in the Free State Act. That was an important point, and he hoped the Minister would see his way to do away with that distinction.

There was one other point he would like to draw attention to in the clause which gave mortgagees the same right as the Land Bank, viz., they could enter upon and sell up the property in satisfaction of the bond. While that might be held to be reasonable for the Government as mortgagees, he did not think it was right that any cessionary of the bond should have that power, and in this clause “mortgagee” was defined as including any cessionary of the bond. Private persons, to whom a bond might be ceded, would thus have the right under this clause to proceed to compulsory sale, without recourse to the Courts.

said the basis of this Bill, he might say, in regard to one or two objections which had been taken, was that the settlers might be able to get their title on exactly the same conditions as they had previously held it as regarded payment, etc., and otherwise under the most favourable terms to them. It had been said in the past that the Transvaal settlers had more favourable terms than the Free State settlers. One was afraid that if they touched the fabric in one respect, they would have to do so in others. In regard to the point raised by the hon. member for Zoutpansberg, he might say that this was not a matter dealt with in the Bill. This only dealt with the Imperial Land Board settlers. He thought they had convinced these people that their fear was unfounded, and they wanted to remove the last trace of it, and in every way eliminate the distinction between them and the rest of the people in the country. In regard to the point raised by the hon. member for Fordsburg as to the terms of repayment, he would say that that simply arose out of the terms that existed, and was not created here. If there were any way of meeting that without opening up the whole question again, he should be glad to do it. As to the other point, he hoped they would never see the time when they would have to cede Government bonds to anybody, but he would suggest that they should meet the objection raised by the hon. member when they came to the committee stage by simply taking out the definition of “mortgagee.”

The motion was agreed to.

The Bill was read a second time and set down for committee stage on Monday.

put the new clause proposed by the Select Committee.

moved, in line 13, after “cheque” to insert “issued under authority of the Board and”.

Agreed to.

said that the investment of the funds was, as the clause stood, to be left in the hands of the Board. He gathered that there would be a very considerable sum of money to be so invested. The Board was allowed to invest in Government securities or on fixed deposit with a bank approved by the Minister. That was precisely the law in regard to the Public Debt Commissioners’ balances. They might get to this, that they might have a large amount of money from both these sources placed in one bank. What he would suggest would be that this investment should be placed under the control of the Public Debt Commissioners.

Oh!

Sir E. H. WALTON said that they would then have one authority which controlled the investments instead of having a second authority.

said that his hon. friend lost sight of the fact that this was not public money. It was money contributed by the mine owners on the one hand and the men on the other, and he should be very sorry indeed to see it handed over to the Public Debt Commissioners.

said the staff was paid by the Government, so that the Government would be responsible if anything went wrong with the funds, and the Government would have to make good any loss.

said one of the Public Debt Commissioners lived at one end of the Union and the others might be away at the time it was desired to make an investment. It would be a most unbusiness-like arrangement to put the control of the money under the Public Debt Commissioners. He had not that touching faith in the Commissioners that some had.

suggested that the investments should be made subject to the approval of the Minister.

pointed out that the Minister and the Public Debt Commissioners might hold different views. The country had a special body for dealing with investments, and why should not that body be given control of the funds.

supported the suggestion of Sir E. H. Walton.

said he was bound to say that he agreed with the hon. member for Port Elizabeth. They must not have innumerable bodies for dealing with funds for which eventually the Government was responsible. He could not understand the attitude of the hon. member for Victoria West. Either they trusted the Public Debt Commissioners or they did not. So long as the Act of Union stood the Public Debt Commissioners must remain.

moved as an amendment that the Board might also invest in stocks of any South African Municipality authorised by law to issue stocks. Municipal stock would be better security than bank stock.

said that the difficulty about that was that they could not realise municipal stock at the moment. The fund had to be operated upon by the Board, and it consisted of money supplied by private people. If it were Government money there would be something to say for putting it under the control of the Public Debt Commissioners.

said that the Compensation Fund would all be spent in a comparatively short time. As to the idea of the hon. member for Port Elizabeth, Central, if he (Mr. Malan) were satisfied that the operations of the fund would not be hampered by putting the balance under the Public Debt Commissioners, he would see no objection to it, but it must be remembered that the money was private money.

You are responsible for it.

We shall not guarantee it. We give £100,000—that is the total amount of our liability. Seeing that you may hamper the operation of the fund by putting it under the Public Debt Commissioners we should leave the matter as it stands.

said there was no real risk in the clause as it stood, but some difficulties might be encountered by putting the funds, under the control of the Public Debt Commissioners.

moved the deletion of sub-section 2 and the substitution of the following: “The Board shall from time to time hand over to the Public Debt Commissioners such funds for investment as may not be required to meet their current requirements.”

That would mean that the money would be made a present of to the Public Debt Commissioners, who would get the benefit of the interest. You must say “on behalf of the fund”.

said that just showed the sort of scatterbrained way in which the thing was considered. (Laughter.) If the balances were handed over to the Public Debt Commissioners, who met only three times last year, they would hang up investments until they held a meeting, and in the meantime the money would not be earning any interest. Six months’ interest might be a considerable sum. The whole thing was quite wrong. The Public Debt Commissioners were the last body he would like to see the money handed over to. He was surprised at the hon. member for Cape Town being in favour of the idea.

Why?

It is unnecessary to go into that now. When the report of the Public Accounts Committee comes up I may have a few words to say on it.

said that the right hon. gentleman the member for Bictoria West had talked about the scatterbrained way in which the thing had been considered, but what was worse than what the right hon. gentleman himself had said? He did not know what happened. He talked of the Public Debt Commissioners holding up large sums of money for six months, and that money did not earn any interest. Well, if they did that they deserved the censure of this House, but they never did anything of the sort. With regard to the difficulty of operating the fund, if the right hon. gentleman had studied the accounts he would have known that the Public Debt Commissioners had to deal with the whole of the railway funds, which amounted to a very considerable sum. The railways were constantly operating upon these funds. They paid large sums into the hands of the Public Debt Commissioners, and were always withdrawing amounts. The Railways warned the Public Debt Commissioners that on certain days they would want certain sums of money, and the Commissioners made provision accordingly. The Commissioners looked after their money; they invested it and saw that it secured interest. All the funds in the hands of the Public Debt Commissioners were credited with their interest, so that from that point of view there was no difficulty. The object of the creation of the Public Debt Commissioners was to bring all the debts under one head, and if his right hon. friend the member for Victoria West were not satisfied with the Commissioners, let him change them. Let the right hon. gentleman join that body himself. Having created the Board, he thought they should let it do its work. If the right hon. gentleman or the House were dissatisfied with the members they should put them out and put some others in their place.

thought the Board would never have a large balance, and, therefore, the clause could be left as it stood. This, after all, was not Government money, and he did not see the necessity for all this discussion.

said that the committee should leave the clause as it was. As had been stated by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Merriman), the clause had been very carefully discussed in committee, and he did not see what was to be gained by handing over the funds to the Public Debt Commissioners. He knew that the Public Debt Commissioners were a very estimable body, but he did not see that they could protect the fund better than the clause did, because the clause provided that any balance of the funds had to be invested in Union Government Stock, which was really a Government guarantee, or in stock guaranteed by the Union Government, which was the same, or in Union Treasury Bills, or on fixed deposit with a bank approved by the Minister. He did not see that there were any other investments left, and he did not know what the Public Debt Commissioners could invest the funds in, because the clause provided for investments in Union Government Stock, stock guaranteed by the Union Government, Union Treasury Bills, or fixed deposit with a bank. The Public Debt Commissioners were going to take greater risks than the clause provided, and as the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Merriman) had stated, it was very much better for the funds to be in the hands of the Board, which might want to deal with them from time to time. It stood to reason that the Public Debt Commissioners could not deal as promptly as the Board, which had full control over the money.

said that he could not allow the remarks of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Merriman) to pass without comment. He had directed an attack upon the Public Debt Commissioners. If he had been dissatisfied with the Bill under which the Public Debt Commissioners were appointed he should have objected to it. If his words meant anything, they meant that the Public Debt Commissioners, one of whom was in this Province, were not capable of carrying on their business. Unless the right hon. gentleman substantiated that statement to the House, he was casting a reflection on the credit of this Union throughout the whole world. The Public Debt Commissioners were created by Parliament to administer the Public Debt of the Union, and to administer large sums of money. With regard to the present Bill, the member for Port Elizabeth (Sir E. H. Walton) had stated that the more convenient method of administering the funds would be through the Public Debt Commissioners. He wished to protest most emphatically against the innuendoes of the right hon. gentleman against the Public Debt Commissioners unless he could bring forward something to substantiate them.

said the fact was he made no innuendoes against the Public Debt Commissioners, but when the time came he would point out in what way, in his opinion, they had mismanaged certain funds entrusted to them. That he would do, but this was not the proper time to do it.

Both amendments were negatived.

The new clause as amended was agreed to.

in reply to Mr. F. H. P. Creswell (Jeppe), said that clause 33 gave the Government power to appoint an independent inquiry into any mine, whether on the Rand or not, and the Minister would not forget that he had that power.

suggested making some provision for dependants of miners.

said that in clause 21 provision was made that if a miner died after he had presented his claim, that claim would be prosecuted by his executors, and the amount would be paid out to them.

said that there was another point he wished to raise. Supposing a miner died without having presented a claim, but he was fully qualified to make the claim, his dependants would suffer for his negligence, unless some clause were inserted.

said that he did not wish to discuss that point now. It raised a practical difficulty, and when the hon. member for Jeppe moved his amendment to the particular clause, they could discuss the matter.

On clause 11,

On the motion of Mr. CRESWELL,

put the amendments proposed by the Select Committee, viz.: In sub-section (1), paragraph (a), line 64, after “for” to insert “a period not exceeding”; in paragraph (b) to add at the end “but not exceeding four hundred pounds in all,” and after paragraph (b) to insert: “Provided that where a monthly payment has been awarded to a miner under this sub-section the Board may, if it is satisfied that the special circumstances of the case warrant it, extend the period of such payment so that the payments made to such miner will exceed four hundred pounds fixed. All such cases shall be specially reported on by the Board under section 12 of this Act.” To omit paragraph (c) and to substitute the following: "To the dependants of a miner which is proved to the satisfaction of the Board to have died from miners’ phthisis while a beneficiary under this Act or while his claim to any benefit there under was being investigated by the Board, such monthly payments as the Board may decide but not exceeding in all an amount representing the difference between four hundred pounds, and any sums already paid to the miner under this Act and under Act No. 34 of 1911.” In sub-section (2), in line 3 thereof: to omit all the words after “section” to the end of the sub-section and substitute “a single sum not exceeding the difference between ninety-six pounds and four hundred pounds (as the case may be) and any sums already paid to the beneficiary or his dependants”; in sub-section (4), lines 58 and 59, to omit “award to the legal representative” and to substitute “pay in respect”; in lines 62 and 63, to omit “the sum of ten pounds for the funeral expenses of that miner” and to substitute “the reasonable expenses of his medical attendance and burial, not exceeding twenty pounds”; and to add the following new sub-section to follow sub-section (4), viz.: (5) No benefits from either fund shall be payable in respect of the death or incapacity of any miner who shall after the commencement of this Act be convicted for three times of a failure to carry out regulations passed by competent authority for the prevention or mitigation of the conditions causing the disease, or if the miner has at the time of entering any employment after the commencement of this Act wilfully or falsely endorsed upon his certificate his claim to be free from the disease, unless his so doing shall be condoned in writing by his employer.

said that he had an amendment on the paper, which was in accordance with his series of amendments, but as the committee was distinctly opposed to his views on the principles of the Bill, he did not propose formally to move the amendment now. He wished, however, to propose an amendment in somewhat different terms, but he wished if to be clearly understood that he and his colleague did not in the least withdraw from the position that a lump sum of compensation was the right way to deal with the matter. He moved as an amendment: In sub-section (1) paragraph (a), line 64, after “impaired,” to omit all the words to the end of the paragraph, and to substitute a monthly payment of one half his average monthly earnings for the last six months during which he was employed before the date of his claim; provided that the amount of such monthly payment shall not be less than £8, and that the total amount of such monthly payments shall not exceed eighteen months’ earnings reckoned as above stated or three hundred and seventy-five pounds, whichever is the less sum”; and in sub-section (1), paragraph (b), line 4, after “impaired” to omit all the words to the end of the paragraph, and to substitute “a monthly payment of one half his average monthly earnings for the last six months during which he was employed before the date of his claim; provided that the amount of such monthly payment shall not be less than £8, and that the total amount of such monthly payments shall not exceed thirty-six months earnings, reckoned as above stated, or seven hundred and fifty pounds whichever is the less sum.” Proceeding, the hon. member said that in the last Government Mining Engineer’s returns he found that 65 per cent. of the men employed underground earned less than £27 per month. If they took £15 per month as a basis that would work out, on clause (b), at 50 months’ duration, and from that must be deducted the number of persons who had died owing to the action of the disease. The best way of arriving at a computation would be to take the maximum figure, because they would be certain that in that case the amount would not be exceeded. A great deal had been said about the magnitude of the burdens, but if they examined the figures they would see that the proportions were small in comparison to the profits of the mines, and the enormity of such a disease as miners’ phthisis. He pointed out that the burdens in connection with the scheme would be very small. In the first year, taking the basis of tonnage, it would be 2½d. per ton, in the second year 2½d., in the third year 4½d., in the fourth year 3½d., in the sixth year 2½d., and in the seventh year 2¼d. This could hardly be called a heavy burden, and it could be easily increased without in any way impairing the industry. He found that no charge would be made on the Insurance Fund until two years had elapsed. At the end of two years the Insurance Fund started with a nest-egg of £440,000, to which was added annually £330,000. Now, he had assumed that the same rate of mortality continued for the next seven years as it was to-day.

He thought they all believed, they all insisted that this present frightful rate of mortality should not continue, but he had assumed it at its worst. In the first year, three years from now, when the Insurance Fund was drawn upon, there would be 1.000 at the end of the year. Five hundred would go on at £90 a year. In the second year the average payment would be 1.500 cases at £180. Four years from now they would be drawing £720,000. He thought the committee would agree with him that, unless at the end of the seven years this frightful wholesale murder were not put a stop to, this House would have to take very much more stringent steps than they were taking now. (Hear, hear.) The whole of the benefits, at the rate he had read out, in the period of seven years from now would mean £2,160,000 on the £15 monthly basis. The total amount of the fund, starting with £440,000 and five years at £330,000, would be £2,090.000. He agreed that, if they took this basis of £15 a month, at the end of seven years the fund would be insolvent. If at the end of seven years that fund were unable to meet the claims of 4,000 men, if the same state of things were going to continue, the benefits for those 4,000 cases should be paid every single brass farthing by the people who took the profits. He further wanted to point out, lest he should be charged with reckless proposals, that on the basis of £15 a month, taking first compensation and afterwards insurance—his figures, he knew, were quite correct—in the first year the charge upon the industry would average about 3½d. per ton, in the second year 5d., in the third year 6d., in the fourth 6½d., and in the fifth 4¾d. This was obviously a high burden upon the mines, but it did not increase the whole burden on the mining industry more than 6d. per ton. The poorer mines they had provided for by this grant of £100,000. He hoped that he would have the support of the committee, and that this amendment would be carried. He might point out that as far as the lowest-paid men were concerned, with this proviso that they should be limited to £8 per month, it would practically leave them exactly as the present Bill did.

said he hoped that the committee would not accept this amendment. They had thought the matter carefully out in committee. It was not a matter of being liberal or generous, but it was a matter of being just. They considered that the amount they had gone to was about as far as they could go. It was more than the weekly payments of any country in the world. If they were to deal with these people as they had been asked to do on the basis of other countries, they would, not get anything at all, because all of them were drawing pay and getting an annual income higher than the exemption in every country for workmen’s compensation. The hon. member for Jeppe had spoken in a most confident way, and said that he was quite accurate in his figures with regard to the burden upon the mines. All he could say was that the hon. member had got access to information which was not before the committee, which was not before the Government, and which was not before the Government Actuary. If they re-enacted the Act of last year and made it permanent, he had not the slightest doubt but that little would have been heard. These people had got infinitely smaller compensation under the Act than they had got now.

Another point lost sight of entirely by the gentlemen on the cross-benches was that they had not mentioned the labourers, the real labourers, in the mines.

What about “European descent”?

said that these people were going to impose a very heavy burden indeed, a much heavier one than was thought, upon the industry now. They had got 200,000 natives in the mines. Under the law these people would get a very considerable thing, ranging from £10 to £50, and they would impose a burden on the industry very nearly as large as the burden imposed by Europeans. Those were the men who were put to the point of danger; those were the men who did not take any precautions, because they were too ignorant to do so, and nobody cared whether they took any precautions or not. He hoped they would get properly compensated. He hoped and trusted that the Native Affairs Department would carry out its duties in that respect to see that these men had every halfpenny of compensation that they were entitled to, paltry as it was. Supervision was going to be a very costly thing if the Mines Department did its duty; it would be costly both to the Government and to the mines. Parliament was deliberately imposing a very heavy burden—but a burden which ought to be imposed—on the mines, because it would tend to economy in the end.

They heard little about accidents, which, on the Rand mines, were the heaviest in the world. These mines ought to be healthy, because they had no fire damp in them. They were killing very nearly a thousand men a year in these mines. One of the witnesses before the Select Committee said, in reply to a question: “Are you going to spend £30,000 for one life?” That was the sort of way in which this matter was looked at. For every £8,000 worth of gold obtained they were killing a man. These things would have to be looked into. He hoped the conscience of the country would be awakened to do its duty. The House would have to look into the matter and see that the Mining Department did its duty, because it was neglect on the part of the Department of Mines that was responsible for these accidents, as well as neglect on the part of the men and the mine owners. It had been stated that the greater part of the accidents were due to the fall of ground; the miners asserted that the increase in the number of accidents was due to the methods of “speeding up,” especially in the leep-levels. The question of accidents and better provisions for minimising danger were of far more importance than the question of compensation that the House was now discussing. He maintained that in view of the very heavy and enormous expense that the country was going to throw on the mines if the House did its duty—because the European miner was only one-half of the liability they were throwing on the mines—he did not think Parliament should go any further than it had done in the matter of compensation.

moved in sub-section 3 the omission of the following words: “remaining after deduction of the cost of such passage.” He supported the increase as a protest against the small amount paid by the Government, and as a protest against the hon. member for Jeppe expecting the mines to pay the whole amount.

asked that the amendment of the hon. member for Jeppe be translated into Dutch, as many members on his side of the House were unable to follow its exact meaning, as it was of a highly technical nature. (Hear, hear.) If he could not understand it he would have to vote against it.

read the amendment in Dutch.

moved, in the new paragraph (c) of sub-section (1), in the first line thereof, after “dependants” to insert “in the order of preference described in the first schedule of this Act”; and in subsection(3), lines 54 and 55, to omit “one half of”. The latter words were expunged in the Select Committee, but through an oversight they had been left in the Bill. If a widow or any other dependant of a miner went outside the Union they would get the same amount as if they had remained in the Union. As to the amendment of the hon. member for Jeppe, he did not think it would be advisable to go into a full discussion of it. The hon. member for Victoria West had gone rather broadly into the question of the liability of the mines generally, but there could be no doubt that the liability which would be thrown on the mines, both directly and indirectly in consequence of that Bill, was a very great one indeed. The right hon. gentleman was quite right—it was somewhat difficult to forecast what the liability of the mines would be, but as near as could be he had made it out for the first seven years. If the Board utilised the power to convert the annuities into lump sum payments in a large number of cases, it would increase the liability of the mines, more particularly in the first few years, very materially. The amount of liability for the first year on the compensation fund would be £140,000, and insurance fund £110,000, total £250,000; second year, compensation £230,000, insurance £110,000, total £340,000; third year, compensation £280,000, insurance £220,000, total£500,000. The totals for the other years were: Fourth year, £410.000: fifth year, £350,000; and sixth year, £255,000. If the larger part of the annuities were commuted and changed into a lump sum payment, then the amounts would be very materially increased. The amount for the first year would be increased to £375.000; for the second year, £415,000; and for the third year, £425,000.

Does that include coloured people?

No; that does not include coloured people or natives. Proceeding, he said that in addition to the direct payments there were indirect payments. Many of the mines had had to spend very considerable sums of money in providing the necessary appliances, and so on, to satisfy the new regulations, and he thought, taking the whole situation into account, it would be unwise on the part of Parliament to increase the burden to be thrown on the mines. After having gone into the matter as carefully as he could, he realised that to increase the burden would seriously affect the well-being of the State. Under these circumstances, he could not accept the amendment which had been proposed.

withdrew his amendment.

said that the right hon. member for Victoria West had stated that the figures which he (the speaker) had quoted were not before the committee, or the Government, or the Government Actuary, but it was a curious fact that they had been confirmed by the figures quoted by the Minister. The right hon. gentleman was continually saying that the measure had been thoroughly discussed in committee. W ell, he must protest against that, because many measures were not discussed as thoroughly as they should have been. The right hon. gentleman himself discussed them at very great length, but they had not been discussed as fully as he (the speaker) should have liked.

said that the amount of compensation was not at all adequate, when they considered the life of the miner and the risks he took. When they considered the question of compensation in committee he took up the position that it was too small, and that it should be levied upon those who were responsible for what had taken place. If hon. members read through the evidence carefully they would see clearly and distinctly that the responsibility did not rest entirely upon the mine owners. It was divided between three—the mine owner, the miner, and the Government. The Government had framed most elaborate regulations, but they found from the evidence that they had entirely omitted to take the slightest precautions to see that the regulations were carried out properly. The inspection of the mines took place only once a year to see that the regulations were carried out, and even then the mineowners or managers were informed of the fact that an inspection was going to take place. Naturally that rendered nugatory the whole idea of an inspection. Since 1902 investigations had been made and Commissions had reported to the Government. In 1902 it was reported to the Government that 21 per cent. of the miners were suffering from miners’ phthisis, but in spite of that nothing was done by the Government. In these circumstances he signed the minority report. He considered that the Government should give a better and higher contribution than they proposed. In the Bill which was brought before the House in 1911 it was distinctly stated that the Government would pay one-half of the compensation.

That clause has been passed.

I am only showing that the compensation is not adequate and that the Government should pay it.

said that the reason he signed the minority report was because he considered the amount of compensation was not sufficient, and that the amount contributed by the Government was also insufficient. The right hon. the member for Victoria West took him to task very severely for what he had said earlier, and challenged him to prove that equal compensation to what was proposed in the Bill was paid in any other part. He wished to remind the right hon. gentleman that a man meeting with an accident on the Rand received double the amount a miner would receive under this Bill. Furthermore, the cost of living on the Rand was very much more expensive than it was in other parts of the world. After hearing all the evidence, however, he did not think he would be justified in casting his vote in favour of the larger amount, because he thought that would do a great injury, not merely to the industrial concerns, but to the whole country.

thought that in line 36, after the word “beneficiary” it would be well to add “or qualified to become a beneficiary”.

said that the amount was rather small, and he would move as an amendment to the amendment proposed by Mr. Creswell, in the words proposed to be substituted, in paragraph (a), to omit “eighteen” and to substitute “twelve”; and in paragraph (b) to omit “thirty-six” and to substitute “twenty-four.”

put the question, that the words in paragraph (a), sub-section (1), proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause.

called for a division, which was taken with the following result:

moved as an amendment to the new paragraph (c) of sub-section (1), in line 35 to omit “from miners’ phthisis”; and in line 38 to omit all the words after “by the Board” to the end of the paragraph, and to substitute “such monthly payments as would have been due to the miner had he not so died.” Why could not the dependants take the monthly payments? Referring to a remark by the hon. member for Germiston, he said it had been frequently pointed out that the fact that a man was a beneficiary was sufficient guarantee that he was a sufferer from miners’ phthisis. If a man died while his case was being investigated and a medical certificate gave the approximate cause of death as something other than miners’ phthisis, the dependants should be provided for.

said that if a man died while his case was being investigated, the Board would decide.

said that if a man had made his claim, the Board had adjudicated, and, therefore, they did not know under which clause he would come.

said that in the case of a man who had made an application and to whom an award had not been made, the hon. member for Germiston did not know under which clause he would be put. The Board would decide independently of his death.

said that if the man were actually suffering from miners’ phthisis that was enough, and therefore the words should be omitted. With regard to the second amendment, he thought they were bound to pay over to the dependants the balance. He could accept both the amendments of the hon. member for Jeppe.

could not agree to the payment being made in a lump sum. They ought to be prudent.

The amendments proposed by the Minister of Mines and Mr. Creswell to the new paragraph (c) of sub-section (1) were agreed to.

moved that the following be a new paragraph (d) to sub-section (1), viz.: “(d) To the dependants of am iner who not having lodged a claim with the Board is proved to the satisfaction of the Board to have suffered from miners’ phthisis and to have been qualified to receive an award under this Act such monthly payments as the Board may deem fit, not being less than eight pounds per month and not exceeding in the aggregate the sum of four hundred pounds.” The object of the amendment, he said, was to cover cases who were really eligible for benefits under the Act, but who, possibly through their own carelessness, did not come within the award. It would be very hard on their dependants.

said he could not accept the amendment as it stood, but if it said “who died from miners’ phthisis,” then there might be something in it.

said it would be very easy to get evidence to show whether the man died from miners’ phthisis.

said, he was afraid the amendments would defeat the object of the Bill, which was to prevent miners’ phthisis. Under the amendment, a man might be induced to work up to the very last.

said he would substitute “died of miners’ phthisis” for “suffering from miners’ phthisis.”

said the sub-section should only apply to cases where a man died on the Rand, and it had been proved to the satisfaction of the Board that he actually did die from miners’ phthisis.

said that he did not see how any man who had miners’ phthisis in a bad form could go to some other country. Further, if the man died outside South Africa, how was it possible to prove that his death was due to miners’ phthisis.

You can’t.

said they might have all kinds of evidence produced which they could not test, and it would be placing an onus on the doctors which they ought not to bear. They should rather discourage claims that were made in this way. If the miner had the disease in a dangerous form, surely his dependants would bring pressure to bear upon him to put in a claim. The amendment would open the door to a good deal of trouble, and possible wrong-doing, too. He did not suppose it would make a great difference in the amounts to be paid, but it would defeat in a measure the object of the Bill.

suggested that the hon. member for Jeppe should put the amendment on the paper.

thought some reasonable limitation of time for the receipt of claims after the death of the person concerned should be inserted. (Hear, hear.)

said it must be proved to the satisfaction of the Board that the man died of miners’ phthisis, and that he would have been qualified to receive an award under this Act.

said if the amendment were withdrawn, they could go into it later on, and come to an agreement.

I will withdraw.

moved an amendment to sub-section 2, authorising the Board in the case of dependants to retain the capital sum awarded, and to invest it for the benefit of the dependants of the deceased.

moved, in sub-section 2, line 44, to insert after “beneficiary”, the words “or his dependants.”

Are not dependants beneficiaries?

Yes.

said that by inserting these words, they included the dependants of dependants, because “beneficiary” covered dependants of the deceased miner, and they were going to extend it by including the dependants of that beneficiary.

said he did not see why they should distinguish in that case between “beneficiary” and “dependant”. He therefore withdrew his amendment.

moved, as an amendment to the amendment proposed by the Select Committee, in line 51, after “paid to” to omit “the” and to substitute “or on account of such”, and in the same line to omit “or his dependants”.

said that the amendment of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Merriman) was going to cast a very serious responsibility on the Board. He would suggest that they had got sufficient discretion as the clause stood.

said that if the Board did not convert the payments, they would continue the monthly payments. There would be no reason to convert the payments unless they could trust the dependants.

They can only retain the money for four years, unless you give them special powers. They must pay out the whole balance within four years.

The amendment moved by the Minister of Mines in sub-section (2) was agreed to.

Mr. Merriman’s amendment was negatived.

moved, in sub-section (3), to delete “free.” He pointed out that under this clause a beneficiary might, if he were a married man, get his passage, and go away without taking his family.

moved to insert after “Union”, “for himself and any person dependent upon him.”

said that what they wanted to get at was that a beneficiary, either the man himself, who was getting compensation, or his dependants, if he had died in the meantime, may go outside the Union, and they might take the members of the family with them, and money spent on that may be advanced by the Board, and deducted from the lump sum of compensation to be paid

suggested that after “Union” the words “for himself and for any person dependent upon him for support” be inserted.

said that that would take the clause outside the term “dependants”, as defined in the Bill. He suggested that they should insert “for him self or his family.”

said that hon. members seemed to be straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

Yes, but we don’t want any illegitimate camels. (Laughter.)

said that the point of this section was that if it were the miner himself who wanted a passage, he should be allowed to get an advance, and the same for a dependant, if he wanted to take him with him He proposed after “Union” to insert, “and if he be a miner, a free passage for himself and his dependants.”

said he hoped the hon. member would not press that amendment, because it seemed to him that it would lead to entirely unnecessary complication. The hon. member pointed out that this amount for passage money came out of the compensation fund, and therefore the companies did not lose anything by it.

moved that after the word “Union” to insert the words “for himself and members of his family dependent upon him.”

said as he had started this little hare he wanted to get the committee out of the difficulty. He would move, therefore, to insert the words “for himself, and if he so desires for his dependants.”

Would “family” include a man’s sister? He moved in line 54, after “Union” to insert “for himself and for any person dependent upon him for support.”

If dependent upon him.

Would this include illegitimate children?

Yes.

The amendments proposed by Mr. Greswell and the Minister of Mines in line 54 were withdrawn.

The amendments proposed by Mr. Nathan were negatived.

The amendments proposed by Mr. Duncan in line 54, and by the Minister of Mines in lines 54 and 65, were agreed to.

An amendment was made in the Dutch version.

before the Chairman put the question that the clause as amended be now adopted, said he hoped that the committee would agree to the deletion of the paragraph which debarred any miner from participating in the benefits of the Compensation Fund if he had been convicted three times for breach of the regulations. It was the business of the law to lay down penalties for breaches of the regulations, and if the breach were serious, then the punishment should be serious, but they should not make these punishments contingent. The committee could understand that it was indubitable that under the conditions of the employment there would be collusion between the mine owners and the miners, to evade the regulations.

said they could not have any protection at all if this were not included. Surely when a man was convicted three times he had warnings enough, and a provision of this sort was likely to do more good than anything else. If a man deliberately went and sinned against life after this Act was passed, then he deserved this penalty.

What about his dependants?

Well, what about the dependants of any other man who does wrong?

said that if a man went on breaking the law he was heavily punished, but this was not an Act for punishing a man for breaking the law; it was an Act to provide for miners’ compensation. Under the Act money was deducted from a miner’s wages for this compensation, and he thought if they did not agree to the suggestion that this penalty should be deleted entirely, then he thought that something should be put into the Bill to the effect that a miner so convicted should at least have the money he paid into the compensation fund returned to him.

said that when the Bill was originally drafted such a clause had been suggested, but if a man were convicted three times his certificate was sure to be taken away, and he would lose the opportunity of working underground. The clause, he said, was agreed to as it stood, and there was no division on it. His sympathy was very much with the hon. member for Jeppe. To cancel a man’s certificate would take away his livelihood from him, and in addition they were giving him no compensation. He would be on their hands, and he and his dependants would have to be provided for in some way or other.

said if these regulations were going to have the effect of reducing mortality their legislation was not in vain, and he was willing to agree, provided the hon. Minister promised that the penalties should be more severe. He quoted the statements of an authority on the working conditions of miners in Cornwall to show that stringent regulations had had the effect of registering a substantial and progressive reduction in the deaths of miners, and he thought there was every reason for believing that the application of stringent regulations would have much to do with preventing miners’ phthisis. He urged that every possible precaution should be taken.

said that penalties with regard to the men were not so very severe. One did not like the idea of penalising a man in his own benefit for not carrying out regulations, but such a man was not only doing an injustice to himself and his family, but to everyone who contributed to the fund. The clause also mentioned that a man should also be deprived of benefit if he wrongfully endorsed upon a certificate his claim to be free from disease. That would be a very serious offence, and he thought the committee would be wise to keep the provision in the Bill.

said that nobody on the Labour benches objected to a man being penalised for breaking the regulations. It was the double punishment they objected to. There was no greater punishment that could be given to a wage-earner than the “sack.”

said the clause, as a whole, was a reasonable one.

It being five minutes to 6 p.m.,

stated that in accordance with the Sessional Order adopted by the House on the 26th April, he would now report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Progress was reported, and leave granted to sit again to-morrow.

said when he moved a reduction of £5 on the salary of the Minister he felt sorry to do so, because he was one of the hardest working Ministers, and if anyone deserved £3,000 a year—he did not say they actually deserved it—it was the present Minister whom he was addressing. His object in moving this was not to censure the department in any way, but to get from the Minister a statement of his policy. He belonged to a profession whose principle was always to protect, as far as possible, the health of the community, and if any department was allowed to drift, it certainly should not be a department like that of Public Health. They had heard on a previous occasion, and it was a matter of great importance, that the Public Health Bill should pass that House. The reasons given were because it was necessary for the organisation of the Health Department and to put it on a definite basis. Secondly, owing to the outbreak of plague in Natal it was necessary to pass a Bill to make certain actions by the Government legal. Again they were told that on account of the different medical administrations in the Provinces, it was necessary to pass a Consolidating Bill. It was pointed out also that they had four medical councils in the Union, which administered medical laws differently, and they found medical men practising under different regulations who were not allowed to practise except in that particular Province. They had medical laws in the various Provinces that required unification. They had laws galore dealing with the public health of the Colony in the various Provinces to-day. Another thing he would like to point out was that there was a want of proper medical supervision in his Department. His attention had been drawn to a circular which stated that information regarding infectious diseases were only to be notified in neighbouring municipalities. Did they ever hear of a more retrogressive step? It was just as necessary for Cape Town to hear what was going on in Johannesburg, as to receive notification of infectious diseases from its neighbouring municipalities. Not only was it necessary for every town in South Africa to be notified of an outbreak of infectious disease, but it was also necessary that if an outbreak of disease occurred outside the Union, say, in a place like Madeira, it should be notified also. Plague, he believed, was on the increase in Natal. (Hon. members: “No.”) They had got small-pox in the Union to-day, and they had vaccination being carried on in a most haphazard manner, more especially in the Native Territories. If there was a country that, required careful vaccination, it was a country where they had a large number of natives like South Africa. All this was owing to one thing, want of a proper medical department to advise the Minister. The Minister must remember that he was not dealing with cattle, but with human life. He would ask the Minister, therefore, categorically: what was his policy regarding the public health of the Union? How did he intend to organise his Department, and on what lines? If he had been acting illegally in dealing with the outbreak in Natal, was he still acting illegally? Did he realise how the passenger trade would be paralysed and human lives imperilled if an outbreak of plague was to spread to the ports? Lastly, he would ask the Minister when he intended to introduce a comprehensive Public Health Act, dealing with all the Acts of the Union?

said he desired to associate himself with the question as to the course the Minister intended to pursue. It was, perhaps, ungenerous to harass a Minister with so much upon his shoulders, but they had been accustomed to courteous treatment in their questions from him. (Hear, hear.) He noticed that the Public Health Bill was the twenty-eighth on the Order paper. The Minister had made two attempts to put a Public Health Bill through that House. On both those occasions he had failed, and, if the Minister would allow him to say so, he had failed because he did not take the precaution of consulting the people who could advise him in the matter. He had a document in his hands calling upon the Minister to do what he ought to have done before, and that was, to refer the various matters which should be included in a Public Health Bill to the people interested in the matter.

This document was from the most representative body of medical opinion in South Africa, viz., the South African Committee of the British Medical Association, and it was signed on behalf of the association by the president and secretary. The resolution set out that they considered that, in order that a satisfactory Public Health Bill should be introduced, the Government should be urged to appoint a Commission to inquire into and report upon certain matters in relation to the public health of South Africa, including a Department of Public Health, a Portfolio of Public Health, the relation of the Union Government to the Provincial Administrations in public health matters, the relation of the Union Government to local authorities in public health matters, and the relation of the Union Government in regard to port regulations. It was urged that the Commission should be appointed to investigate these matters during the recess and report. Dr. Macaulay, in conclusion, said he would appeal to the Minister to consider the advisability of appointing such a Commission during the recess.

said the general opinion in the country was that the Medical Council possessed excessive powers, and he regretted that a Bill had not been put forward to curtail those powers. If a medical man were accused of unprofessional conduct the Medical Council acted as judge and jury. This Board had absolute power over all medical matters, and he contended that this was an unsound state of affairs. They would not even permit a doctor to make known that he could be consulted in a town at given times.

pointed out that this matter was not under discussion now.

expressed his intention of raising the matter later on.

said that he wished to refer to the statement made by the hon. member for Woodstock that plague was spreading rapidly at Durban. He did not know where the hon. member had got the information from. He might say that he was in very close touch with the authorities there, and, as far as he could learn, there was nothing of the sort. Mr. Henwood paid a tribute to the splendid work done by the Government and their officials in connection with dealing with the outbreak. He urged that, seeing that the Public Health Bill had practically been withdrawn, it was desirable to reenact the Natal Act for another year, so that they might have sufficient machinery to cope with any outbreak of plague or small-pox, for instance.

said that he wished to call attention to an appointment of a district surgeon which looked very much like favouritism. He read a letter which had come into his hands in reference to the appointment of a district surgeon at Colesberg, in the course of which the writer stated that one of the most telling object lessons, it seemed to him, was the appointment of a district surgeon at Colesberg. This person’s record qualifying him for the appointment of district surgeon included one conviction for being drunk and disorderly and drunk and using obscene language in a railway carriage, an order by the Resident Magistrate of the district forbidding a supply of alcoholic liquor to him, an order by the Supreme Court declaring him prodigal and putting his estate under curatorship, and a conviction by the Medical Council of improper and unprofessional conduct for drunkenness rendering him incapable of attending to a patient. In spite of this and also in spite of the perfectly well-known fact that he had not then and since had not amended his ways, he was appointed district surgeon in the very district in which all these facts were notorious, and, added the writer, “to finish the story, the Government has now been forced absolutely to get rid of him, owing to its being utterly impossible to find him sober for a long time, and the appointment is again vacant. This case is nepotism, not necessarily racialism, because there are two other practitioners in the place, both Dutch Afrikanders.” Mr. Struben went on to say that it seemed to him that this was an extremely serious matter, and, if the facts were correctly set out, he thought they deserved explanation.

suggested that the vote be taken seriatim.

said that the committee had been discussing the vote as a whole up to the present, and he did not see why it should be divided up now.

said he wished to raise the question of vaccination. Lately there had been a tendency on the part of the Government to employ laymen in the matter of vaccination. He had a letter dealing with a case in which a certain district surgeon in the Native Territories was instructed to go through the district to vaccinate the natives. He did so, but the lymph was not efficacious, and he reported to the Government. He was then instructed not to continue to vaccinate. In the meantime there was an outbreak of small-pox, and an order was then issued that he should instruct a layman, one of the men of the C.M.R., how to vaccinate. He refused to do so, and very rightly so, as a medical man, but perhaps his refusal was rather hasty and he was suspended. He (the speaker) wanted to point out from a medical point of view what a serious thing it was for laymen to go through a district vaccinating people. He knew the answer would be that it was done on the score of economy, that medical men could not be got, that the people who were vaccinated were only natives, and that anybody could vaccinate. He, however, contended that it was professional work, and that it was a most dangerous thing to employ laymen to vaccinate people It was impossible to instruct a layman in this matter in a week when it took a medical man five years to learn the work. He had personal knowledge of syphilis having been given to a child as the result of vaccination by a layman. He quoted a letter from the “South African Medical Journal,” in which it was stated that laymen had been employed in a district where nine medical men practised. There was no excuse for that. If a medical man could not be obtained there might be an excuse, but in this case there was none. No one except a medical man knew the dangers of vaccination. There was another matter in regard to the lymph. He must say that of late it had been very much better, but there was a great difficulty in getting it in the country. Lately it had been very much improved in the Cape Province.

said that he would like for the second time in the Union Parliament to draw attention to the great discrepancy between the care bestowed upon the health of the community and the care which was devoted to agriculture. He found that he had got a new recruit in the House. He referred to the right hon. gentleman the member for Victoria West (Mr. Merriman), who in another place spoke of the necessity of medical research in South Africa. The vote for Government analysts, bacteriologists, and pathologists was only some £16.000. whereas he found that the vote for field-cornets was £24,755. He thought that the vote for medical research was scandalous in a young country like this. The salaries of the Government analysts, bacteriologists, and pathologists were utterly inadequate, and although they were modest and devoted to their work there was no reason why the matter should not be raised in the House and justice done to them. He hoped that Parliament in its endeavour to do justice to the country would do justice to these men. Much as they desired to go on with their research work, the fact remained that they were so hampered with routine work that it was impossible to do so, and he appealed to the Minister to do something in the matter.

wished to draw attention to the differences in the salaries paid to district surgeons in different parts of the country. He hoped there would be some attempt to co-ordinate all these various salaries in the different parts and as far as possible put them at all events on the same basis, if not the same amount right through the Union.

There was another matter he would like to draw attention to. There had been petitions presented to that House in favour of doing away with the Contagious Diseases Act of Cape Colony. It did not obtain throughout the Union, but there was a great deal of evidence to the effect that it did not accomplish what it was intended to accomplish. It would be in the memory of members of the late Cape Parliament that a Select Committee was appointed to consider this question, and that committee, whose chairman was the hon. Mr. Theron, Chairman of the House and of the Afrikander Bond, reported in favour of repeal of the law. The House would agree, he thought, that there was a great deal to be said for doing away with the Act, which encourages, as it does, to a certain extent, the recognition of vice. He did not think it was the duty of the Government to encourage licentious men by putting a certain class of women in the country under supervision, in order that men might sin with impunity. It was a matter that was germane to that vote, and he was only voicing the opinion of a large number of people in the country, and not the kind of people whose opinions were worth nothing at all. He would be glad to have an expression from the Minister whether the Government felt inclined to put legislation of that kind on the same level in Cape Colony as it was in other parts of the country, and also to raise the age of consent to 16, as it was elsewhere in the Union.

He asked the Minister of the Interior some time ago a question regarding the exercising of supervision over the bioscopes which existed in the Union. (Laughter.) Mr. Schreiner did not press for the information, but sat down, saying it was, perhaps, in the Department of the Minister of Justice.

said he had listened with attention to the speech of the hon. member for Woodstock, who pleaded on behalf of the interests of district surgeons. It was unfair, however, for those gentlemen to compete with chemists. He asked for protection to chemists, who should be given the Tight of preparing the medicines for District Surgeons. This matter should not be left solely in the hands of the District Surgeons themselves, especially as chemists in the rural districts found it very difficult to make a living. He proceeded to raise the question of District Surgeons taking part in politics. These people drew fixed salaries, and were on a similar basis as field-cornets, and therefore they should not take part in politics. If one were barred so should the other be.

said applications had been invited for the position of Assistant District Surgeon at Bosmanspoort, but there was no house for him, and he ought to be allowed to hire another house. Mr. Kuhn proceeded to refer to the Medical Council, and dealt with the case of a doctor in the vicinity of Cape Town, who had been brought before the Medical Council on a charge of unprofessional conduct, and although he had been found not guilty, the other medical men refused to have consultations with him. The Medical Council, he held, was a grave danger to promising young doctors, and he urged that only a qualified bench of judges should be allowed to judge upon the conduct of medical men. He felt strongly on this matter, and hoped the Minister in bringing in legislation would not lose sight of this. Why should not a doctor be allowed to announce his intention to settle in a given place?

said he was sorry to have to inform the Minister that since the Union of these Provinces there had been no report on public health. That was a very regrettable fact, and many who were interested in matters of public health were under a considerable disadvantage on account of that. Last session some hon. members brought to the notice of the committee the condition of affairs with reference to a specific disease in the large district of Bechuanaland and in the northern parts of the Transvaal. He believed the matter was provided for under sub-vote (f), but he would like to know from the Minister what was done with a view to checking the further spread of this specific disease in those parts. He understood that a special kind of medicine, which was well known as 6 0 6, had been sent up for experiment in these parts, but they had no information as to the success of the experiments, and they would like to know. The matter was evidently one which deserved the attention of the hon. Minister, and he hoped he would be in a position to relieve them from their anxiety in the matter. Some of their medical friends in the committee would be very glad, for the sake of their patients—he hoped they did not have many who were in that particular dilemma—to know the result of the experiments.

said that up to date the disease had been very bad among the natives, who had been treated by the District Surgeons. There was a report that whole-time officers were to be appointed, and he would like to ask the hon. Minister whether it was the intention to change the present policy, and whether these special officers were to be appointed to deal with this matter? It was a very serious question whether the law should not be made more stringent. What they felt was that the law was not strict enough, and that they did not get the powers they should have if they were going to cope with this disease. He would like to know—the disease was exceedingly prevalent among the people he had spoken of—whether the Minister intended to continue the present policy, or whether he intended to appoint a whole-time officer to cope with this disease.

thought it was rather presumptuous of the hon. member for Prieska to meddle with the doctors, and should rather confine himself to questions of public health. The Medical Council was an old institution, which had to be treated with respect. Proceeding, the hon. member dealt with the question of such diseases as tuberculosis. Malta fever, malaria, etc., which he urged should be tackled by a proper medical department in a proper manner.

said he sympathised with the hon. member who had spoken last. He also felt somewhat indignant that a lay member like the hon. member for Prieska should take it upon himself to criticise a venerable profession like that. (Laughter.) He would have felt very indignant if he had criticised the profession of the law. But he did not think he need be indignant any longer because professions had to listen to what the public said. An hon. member asked what was the policy of the Government in regard to the suppression of venereal diseases in his constituency, where there was a large native population. The disease was very common there, and also in the Northern Transvaal. The idea was at one time to appoint a whole-time officer also in Bechuanaland, but he was, himself, rather doubtful about that point. He thought more good would be done by strengthening the hands of the district surgeons, and the wanted to give that policy a chance to succeed, rather than take the matter out of the hands of the district surgeons and appoint a special officer. He agreed that special measures should be taken; but he thought it should be possible to deal with it through the district surgeons. When he was there last year he found, from the district surgeons, that the work had been very carefully dealt with by them. All the cases were known, and they were recorded, and it was simply now a matter of keeping in touch with them and thus stamping out the disease. In the Northern Transvaal they had gone in for a different policy. The disease was so common in those parts that they had appointed a whole-time officer, whose whole time was spent in going amongst the natives treating them and telling them how to treat themselves. At the same time all the district surgeons were busy on this work and they were utilising the police force in coping with this disease, and he was sure that the energetic measures now being prosecuted in regard to the disease in these parts would probably lead to a great improvement in the future.

The special remedy an hon. member had referred to could only be applied in hospitals and could not be used on the veld. It was a most delicate and most dangerous remedy. As his hon. friend must know opinion in the medical world was divided in regard to it. They had been trying it in the hospitals and in the Prisons Department, and the official opinion seemed to be favourable. They said that about 80 per cent, of the cases treated with this remedy would appear to be complete cures. No doubt in some cases the remedy did not lead to an entire cure, but in the large proportion of cases 6 0 6 cured.

How many deaths?

Well, it is a dangerous remedy and can only be applied by medical experts, and, as I said, medical opinion is somewhat divided about it; but in official circles the opinion is rather favourable towards it; and a very large proportion of what appear to be complete cures have been found. Proceeding, the hon. Minister said that his hon. friend the hon. member for Zoutpansberg (Mr. Mentz) had asked him why he did not prevent the district surgeons from interfering in politics, and he pointed to the laudable example of his right hon. friend the Prime Minister, who had circularised the Field-cornets asking them not to take part in politics. Well, he (the hon. Minister) adhered to his opinion of last year that the district surgeons were not real civil servants, as they did not give their whole time to the Government.

It was significant that most of them did not belong to his party.

It is a learned profession. (Laughter.)

Well, they are not of our parry.

You get it back in the Field-cornets.

said he thought the district surgeons were in much the same position as an advocate or an attorney who undertook some work for the Government. They received fees and a retainer, and most of them were against him in politics, but he had left them alone. Well with regard to the question raised by the hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. Schreiner), of the discrepancies which existed in the salaries of these district surgeons, it was quite impossible to give them all the same salaries. The discrepancies which he pointed out existed for, he believed, a number of years even under the old Cape Colony Government, and either it was justifiable on good grounds or nobody paid much attention to it and it was left alone; and he did not think they were made to set the world alight and to correct all these discrepancies. He did not know whether it was necessary for him to pass his opinion on the question raised regarding the Contagious Diseases Acts in force at certain of the ports of the Union. His personal opinion was against those Acts. He did not think they led to good morals or sounder health. But there, again, they had these Acts which had been in force for years, and, though he would resent their being applied to other parts of the Union, he did not think there was any necessity to interfere with them as they are. The hon. member for Wynberg had made a rather serious charge by reading that letter. He was very sorry he did so. He could assure his hon. friend that it was not a case of nepotism at all. The man was no relation to him in any way, and he had simply taken the older man, who had been district surgeon before. He thought it could be done without harm to the public service, and he had tried to exercise some discretion in the matter; and there had certainly been no neglect.

The position in Natal had been properly stated by the hon. member for Durban. They had had the plague completely in hand, and it had, as they thought, been stamped out in Durban; but unfortunately, some mistake seemed to have been made, and there was one place, which for some inexplicable reason had not been disinfected at the time, and that was where the cases had occurred. With these cases in hand they would probably get an end of plague in Durban, and it was not necessary to be alarmed at all in regard to the plague there. That was one of the reasons why he had not proceeded with the Public Health Bill, which had been so urgent at one time, and on which they had spent such a time. He felt very disappointed over that, and if hon. members reflected they would come to the conclusion that it was next to impossible to carry through any comprehensive measure on public health. (Voices: “Why?”) He had tried to narrow the issues down to two simple points, and he had found it impossible to carry even these two points. The hon. member for Denver (Dr. Macaulay) had asked why a Commission was not appointed. Hon. members must bear in mind that on such a question as public health there was the greatest diversity of opinion in a country like this. What one part of the community desired was repudiated by another part, and he was afraid that these two failures of his (in regard to the Public Health Bill) might have very far-reaching consequences; and those who followed him in that office might find even greater trouble in regard to public health than he had. It was a question which would more and more demand the serious attention of the Legislature. Attempts had been made to deal with the matter, but they had not been sympathetically met. He hoped that they would not have to register a third and a more disastrous failure still. He recognised that it was necessary for them to deal with the public health, and more and more seriously as the years went by, but what with the division of authority, of the Union and the Provinces, and what with lay and expert opinion in that House, the future Minister of the Interior might fight shy of that issue, which had such very serious consequences as far as that country was concerned. He did not know when that comprehensive Bill would be forthcoming.

“Won’t you be there for three years more?”

There have been great changes during the last two months.

Then his hon. friend (Dr. Macaulay) asked what in regard to the Medical Council Bill. It was a question which affected the medical profession very seriously. Shortly after Union, at the instance of his medical friends, he had appointed a little Commission to go into that question. He had appointed that Commission to make recommendations for a comprehensive Medical Act for the Union. It had gone into the matter, had met and reported; but in regard to some of the matters he had thought it inadvisable to carry them into legislation, as they raised issues very troublesome to deal with in that House; and the result had been that he felt somewhat embarrassed, and during the recess he had met another small body, who expressed difficulties with the report, and he thought they came to an agreement, more or less, as to the lines they should take in framing a uniform Bill for the whole of the Union. He had undertaken to have a Bill drafted on those lines, and to circulate it amongst the Medical Councils. Hon. members would understand that he had been overwhelmed with Bills that had been drafted, and the amount of drafting that had been done had been stupendous. (A voice:“And redrafting.”)What he was speaking of now was the re-drafting, and that had been completed, and what he proposed was to carry out what he had undertaken, and to circulate it amongst the Medical Councils: and next session, probably, if there were not too great pressure on the time of the House, he hoped to deal with that measure. In conclusion, he said that in the Native Territories it was not feasible, or in the interests of the country, to do without lay vaccinators, who were very useful persons, if properly trained, and if they knew their work.

said that they were all obliged to their hon. friend in regard to his clear and lucid explanation of the Public Health Bill, but his hon. friend had intended to pass the Bill that session, because they all remembered his eloquence in favour of that Bill being passed that session, as he stated that, if it did not pass, he would not have been able to deal with the unfortunate outbreak of plague in Durban. Now his hon. friend forecasted the drafting of the third Bill He wanted to ask his hon. friend if he would clear up the position in connection with one of the first items on vote 10—the Government Bacteriologist, Analyst, and Pathologist—because his hon. friend would remember that some few months ago, when they had the discussion in connection with the Civil Servants of that country, the Right Hon. Minister of Agriculture, in reply to certain strictures which he (the hon. member) had passed upon the alteration or transference of the Chemical Department from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of the Interior, had stated that the Government had decided that there should be only one division of chemistry, under one Ministerial department. The right hon. gentleman had also stated that that department would be under one head, who was Dr. Juritz. Otherwise, the right hon. gentleman had also stated, there had been no other changes made whatsoever. Well, that had caused him considerable surprise at the time, because he knew that the Right Hon. Minister of Agriculture would not make an authoritative statement to the House except he was under the impression that such was the intention of the Department. But when he (the hon. member) looked at the Estimates, he found that such was not the case. If they went back to page 44 of the Estimates, they would find, under the Agricultural Department, that there was a chemist drawing a salary of £450 per annum. Well, if they had a chemist in the Agricultural department like that, it was impossible that they could have one chemical department for the whole of the Union, under one Ministerial department, as the right hon. gentleman had stated, and he thought that was a position which ought to be fully explained. He found that that gentleman was entirely and absolutely outside the control of the gentleman whom they understood was to have sole control. What he desired to say, was this going to be an advantage to agriculture? He was not going into the question of the great mistake when the Chemical Department was transferred from the Agricultural Department to the Department of the Interior, but that a gentleman who spent years in analysing the soil should be superseded by a gentleman who was now going to start, investigation for the first time, he thought his hon. friend should tell them wherein lay the advantage of this. His hon. friend must remember that the best work the Chemical Department could carry on was the investigation of the scientific agricultural development of the country. They were certainly not going to do good service by breaking up the department, as appeared from the Estimates, and transferring a gentleman who had rendered such signal service to agriculture.

said he could not quite comprehend the mysterious point his hon. friend had raised. So far as he understood, the position was that before Union several of the departments had chemists working under them. After Union they had several departments run by the Department of Agriculture and some by the Department of the Interior. This Chemical Department had worked very largely independently. They had a chemical laboratory in Cape Town and another in Johannesburg, and it was quite impossible to co-ordinate them. It was not a case of finding a very high office for a very able man; it was a case of what was best for the service. It was impossible to coordinate the laboratories in Cape Town, Graham’s Town, Bloemfontein, and Johannesburg, and all they could do was to move them under one department. The Agricultural Department thought they might deal with the matter, and the idea presented itself of how to group all these under that department, but after a good deal of discussion it was thought best to group them under the Department of the Interior. This department, as they knew, was a department of experts—(laughter)—and so it was thought it would be best to co-ordinate it under his department. (Renewed laughter.) He was not specially keen upon having these very able men under him; but he would struggle with adversity. (Laughter.) It was not a question of who was the ablest man. The head of the laboratory at Johannesburg was a most able man, and it was indivious to draw distinctions between one chemist and another, and to say who would be chief chemist and who would be his assistant. These experts were most difficult people to deal with. Why, therefore, raise these stormy issues? He hoped they were all satisfied. The chief chemist idea was simply an aspiration that had not materialised. He did not know whether the statement which he had made was as lucid as it might be. (Laughter.) The upshot of the whole matter was that the big organisation which was contemplated at one time was not found possible to be carried out. He was not so certain about the question of soil analysis, and, therefore, he would not like to speak further on the subject. He thought they had done the best possible thing that they could have done so far as the big officials were concerned.

said he quite agreed that the Minister was not as lucid as was generally the case. Their point was that they did not think that it was advisable to have two chemical departments. He was not dealing with individuals; he was dealing with departments. The Minister had said their contention was wrong, and that there was only one department under one Ministerial head. He said that by referring to the Supplementary Estimates the Minister would find that that was not correct. There were two chemical departments. Then with regard to the question of soil analysis, the Minister would find if he turned to the Supplementary Estimates that there was a soil chemist also.

Odds and ends.

There are too many odds and ends. Continuing, he said he was not dealing with the department that the man should be under. If the work concerned agriculture then it should be under the head of the Agricultural Department. Why could not all these matters be brought under one Ministerial head?

said he did not contend that the solution which they had arrived at was a satisfactory solution. What he had intended was that they should have an agricultural chemist of the very highest qualifications for the Union. Well, the men they required held big positions in other countries and were carrying out experimental work of the very highest kind, and it would be treachery if they were to be enticed away from those positions. Of course, it was very difficult to get a man of that stamp at a moment’s notice.

You have splendid material here.

I think as good as anywhere else on earth. Continuing, he said that he did not argue that they had arrived at the best solution of the matter, but that they had done the very best they could possibly have done under the circumstances. The point was that some people were never satisfied with what was done.

We are thinking of the interests of the country.

We are dealing with the efficiency of the service. Continuing, he said that it was possible when he had more time that he would set to work to reorganise this department. He thought they had done what was best in the very short time they had had at their disposal.

said he would like a reply from the Minister with regard to his question concerning small-pox.

asked whether he was correct in understanding the Minister to say that he would not be able to carry a comprehensive public health measure for the reason that he would not be able to take the measure through the House?

Oh! No. I can assure the hon. member that I never despair in a case like this. One of these days my hon. friend will see me bring in a fresh Bill. (Laughter.) Continuing, he said that he would inquire into the question which had been raised by the hon. member for Victoria County.

said that the Minister, in the course of his remarks, gave hon. members on that side the impression that it would be hopeless for him to endeavour to carry a comprehensive health measure through the House. The Minister had used the very arguments which he (the speaker) used in order to try and induce the Minister to appoint a Commission to go into the Whole matter. He did not think, that the Minister had a leg to stand on. (Laughter.) He hoped the Minister would listen to the words of wisdom that had been addressed to him on the subject. Even yet there was time for the Minister to appoint a committee—if he did not like the word “Commission”—to take up the matter during the recess, and go into all the conflicting interests that were involved. He wished to assure the Minister that the medical profession of the country were not against him; they were as anxious as anybody else to see a comprehensive public health measure introduced as early as possible.

said that the Minister had given a most unsatisfactory answer to his question. He admitted that the officer was got rid of.

He resigned.

He was told to resign, I think. He ought never to have been appointed. Continuing, he said that he would like to know the advice upon which this officer was appointed by the Government. The Minister had said that there could be no suspicion of nepotism because he (the Minister) was not related to the person Who had been appointed. But the Minister knew very well that the official who was appointed was closely associated with one of the gentlemen with whom he (the Minister) was associated. He thought that these matters should be treated in a most careful manner. The Minister had said that he was sorry that he (Mr. Struben) had read the letter. Well, it certainly was an unsavoury subject, but he would tell the Minister that if any other cases of a similar sort came to his notice he would not have the slightest hesitation in reading any letters that were associated with those cases. It was a scandalous case. He pointed out that the facts which he had mentioned to the House were on official records. If he did get any letters connected with similar cases he would read them, as he thought he would only be doing his duty.

said that he did not want to debate the question of the lepers again, because he had already had that opportunity. But he would point out to the Minister that the medical officer in charge of the lepers on Robben Island was appointed every three years Now, at the end of three years the gentleman who held the post took away the results of all the investigations that he had made during that time, and the next man did the same. The result was that the country lost the benefit of these investigations. He thought it would be an excellent plan for the Minister to get the appointments made by an institution like the Tropical School of Medicine. When the incumbent had finished, he could go back, and the next man coming in would go on with the work and the investigations would be continuous. There was one other point he would mention. He saw the sum of £12,000 was put down elsewhere for buildings on Robben Island. He thought they should make up their minds as to whether they were going to continue the Leper Settlement on Robben Island before they spent such a large sum on buildings there. He also urged that steps should be taken to see that the attendants in lunatic asylums not only obtained, but were forced to take, their annual leave at the due time.

said he would like to call attention to the increased cost of asylums. They were maintaining in the Union to-day no less than eleven asylums, and although they had abolished one, the cost now was considerably higher than it was in the first year of Union, the increase in regard to salaries being £12,256, and other expenses £16,000. He also drew attention to the disparity in the percentage of salaries in relation to the total cost of the establishments, mentioning that at Graham’s Town it worked out at 46 per cent., while at Maritzburg if was only 35½ per cent. The hon. member also alluded to the amount of outstandings in connection with asylums, and urged that his was a matter which required attention.

said he would like to remind the Minister of a petition he presented to the House in the early part of the session in regard to a young man named Heynes, who was at Robben Island, and to ask him that the expert who was arriving very shortly should make it one of his first duties to prepare a special report on that case.

spoke of the need of better accommodation for religious services at Emjanyana Leper Asylum. He wanted to ask the Minister why natives were not included in the numerical column. He wanted to know if it was a fact that these servants of the Government were not put in the numerical column because their skins were black. If that were so, let the Minister say so at once. He knew that some coloured people were included in the numerical column of this vote. If they were not included in the column because their skins were black, it certainly was not because they were part-time officers.

said that the hon. member’s reference to the exclusiveness of the Church of England had aroused his curiosity in regard to the chaplains on Robben Island. There were four chaplains there, presumably all resident. Two received £200 per annum each, the third £100 per annum, and the fourth £75 per annum. They were included in the numerical column, and presumably they were not black, but he wanted to know which of the four chaplains belonged to the exclusive sect; and further, whether the two chaplains who were receiving £100 and £75 respectively were labourers who were not worthy of their hire. Possibly they might be half-timers. He wanted to know the denominations these chaplains represented, and which denomination’s were receiving the £200 per annum. He also wished to draw the attention of the Minister to the absurdly low rates of pay paid to the men who worked on Robben Island. He found that there were three bakers, presumably skilled men, receiving £78 per annum, rising by increments of £4 10s. per annum, to £96. In other words, it took these bakers 4½ years to reach £96. An hon. member had suggested that possibly they were coloured men. Well, that was the only objection trade unionists had to coloured men, namely, that they worked for less than the standard rate of pay. There were two butchers, also presumably skilled men, who received £78, rising by increments to £96, which was reached in four years. He found one engine driver in one place receiving £150 per annum, rising by annual increments of £6 to £132. That was at the rate of 5s. 8d. per day for the smaller sum, and 7s. 2d. per day when the maximum sum was reached. Lower down he found that there were two engine drivers, who were receiving £102, rising by annual increments of £6 to £132 and £180, and he wanted to know whether these engine drivers were engine drivers only or whether they had to do their own repairs. If they had to do their own repairs, they were very much underpaid, because the standard rate of pay for Gape Town fitters varied from a minimum of 12s. to a maximum of 14s. per day. When one took into consideration the circumstances in which these people lived, cut off from the main land, he thought it would be an inducement to the Minister to pay higher than the standard rate in Cape Town. There were also 46 attendants, receiving from £78 to £96 per annum. Their work was rough and dangerous, and if the statement were true that leprosy was contagious then these men were liable to contract it. He noticed that at the Labour Bureau in Cape Town and in the daily Press there were advertisements constantly appearing for attendants, the rate of pay being 3s. 10d. per day, which he considered a ridiculous wage, and which he believed was the reason for these advertisements constantly appearing. Surely the Minister should consider it advisable to induce men by the offer of higher pay to stay over there, for it must be better for men to get used to the work. They would become more dependable, and the only way to induce them to stay was to give them more pay. In the circumstances the wages these men were receiving were too low and kept them in a state bordering on degradation.

referred to the remark of the hon. member for Tembuland in describing the Church of England as an exclusive church.

There is nobody thinks more of the Church of England than I do.

said that the hon. member for Springs had asked the question regarding the salaries of the four chaplains at Robben Gland and why there was a difference, evidently suggesting that the clergyman of the Church of England was paid at the higher rate. He happened to know the gentleman who was the Church of England clergyman at Robben Island. He was a man who had occupied in England a position of absolute independence, but had now given up everything which the majority of people considered valuable, to devote himself to these lepers on Robben Island. The hon. member for Springs would agree that the sum of £200 per year was not excessive for a man who had sacrificed his life in that way.

With regard to the Valkenberg Asylum, he understood there had been a total recast of the salaries. An entirely new scale and a different system of allowances had been instituted. He had been informed there were some cases in which the new scale operated harshly. For instance, the maximum salary for the male nursing staff was now £220 per annum. He was informed it was a lower maximum than before, but if it was not so the salary that was now the scale did not carry the allowances as it did before, for the salary with the allowances was higher than the maximum now. He would ask the Minister to give the House some assurance that this matter would be gone into again. He raised the question regarding the salaries of the chaplains at Robben Island.

Why is there any differentiation at all? These were points they knew nothing about. Here were four chaplains paid at different rates. He was not grudging for one moment that two of these chaplains should receive £200 a year. If that was for their whole time it was little enough, but what he wanted to get from the Minister was whether there was any distinction being made, and if not, why were these different sums being paid?

said he was sorry that the question of the Church had entered into the discussion, and he must hold the hon. member for Tembuland responsible to some extent. He had no reason to say anything about the Church of England. His only reason seemed to be that they had not attended the service he held there. (Laughter.) He should not have made these comparisons. He would see into this matter of the male nursing staff which had been referred to. In reply to the hon. member for Cape Town he said there had been a large increase of the attendants at these asylums. Possibly they were taking a wider field of insanity. Certainly, the numbers were increasing rapidly, and that would account partly for the increase. Before Union the wages of attendants in these asylums in some parts were shocking, and they had been revising the rates of the salaries for the lower grade staff, which were now much higher than before. Some discrepancies might yet exist, but the back of the work was broken. They were trying to keep the men, and to attract a good class of man. In regard to Robben Island they should make up their minds what they were going to do, but they should not spend money while meditating. If they could get a good man for a longer period than three years, so much the better. They had got this gentleman now who was coming to South Africa, and he was told that they were getting one of the best men it was possible to get in the world. He was a very highly trained expert who had devoted many years of work to leprosy, and it was to be hoped that he would stay for three years or more, and that his stay would lead to some valuable discovery. It may be that he would solve the question. In reply to the hon. member for Tembuland, in connection with the exclusion of natives from the numerical column, he thought he had never heard of amore novel grievance. Did his hon. friend know that he himself, although he was getting £400 a year, did not appear in the numerical column? (Laughter.) These natives, Indians and part time officers, were not on the establishment, and surely his hon. friend could not add this to the other grievances which, to his mind, the native population was suffering. It was very difficult to meet objections such as his hon. friend had made Replying to Mr. Madeley’s question regarding the engine-drivers and repairing, he did not know whether they did their own repairing, but he hoped they did and were satisfied. With regard to the case of Heynes, he should be very sorry to see any injustice done there. The case was before the Supreme Court, but it went against Heynes; but it would be reconsidered.

said he wanted to show the Minister that the men he had referred to were on the establishment last year. A reference to the memorandum would show that they were on the establishment, though he would not say that they were on the fixed establishment. There was some reason for those men having been included in last year’s Estimates. There was an absolute change, and it was of no use for the Minister to suggest to them that there had been no change.

said that as a matter of fact the memorandum and the placing of those men in the column in the Estimates was the work of the Treasurer. He would therefore suggest to the hon. member that he should put the question to the Treasurer when his vote came up.

said he believed the Minister was twofaced—he was the Minister of the Interior and also the Minister of Finance.

said that the Minister would recollect that earlier in the session the question of the tremendous amount of the vote for printing and stationery was raised, and at that time the Minister made the request that the discussion be deferred until the Estimates came up, a request which appeared to have been met by hon. members on that side of the House. Now as they wished to bring up that question he hoped the Minister would tell them what policy the Government intended to pursue in regard to that matter They had pointed out the gigantic amount now being spent on printing and stationery in South Africa. This year the vote amounted to £233,000.

According to the 1910 figures the bill for printing and stationery in Great Britain including the cost of Hansard, which was a considerable item in the House of Commons, came to £739,000, which worked out at 4d. per head of population of the United Kingdom. Their figures in South Africa worked out at 4s. per head for the white population.

Why not black?

As the hon. member knew, it was rather a difficult thing to arrive at an acceptable basis, or as to what factor they were going to take. They had had the report of the Public Accounts Committee, with reference to printing, before them, and the evidence, which had been taken at considerable length, had been printed, but unfortunately the deductions of the Public Accounts Committee from that evidence were not yet before hon. members. The reading of the evidence was rather interesting, and the Public Accounts Committee seemed to have taken considerable pains to endeavour to arrive at what the facts were. A good deal of what was called “cork-screwing” had to be done, and it seemed to him that the net result of the investigation had amounted to this: that in the long run the Government printer had had to admit that there was considerable extravagance in regard to the matter of Government printing; that economies were easily possible if only the department would take economy into consideration: and greater economy still was possible if business principles were to prevail in the giving out of printing work. The gentleman in question had admitted, first of all, that it was impossible to print more cheaply in the Government Printing Works at Pretoria than at the coast. By and by he was bound to admit that the Government Printing Works could print almost as cheaply as on the coast. And later he said that the whole point was that if they had the Government Printing Works at Cape Town, and they were run efficiently, they would save a considerable amount. Mr. Fichardt had asked: “If your Works were at Cape Town, you could turn out work much more cheaply?” And the answer had been “Yes.” What he (the hon. member) contended, was that the printing of the Union should be done as cheaply as possible, and that the economic advantage of any place should be taken advantage of in any contracts which were given out by the Union. The evidence would tend to show that instead of going on business lines and saving as much as possible, the Government’s policy seemed to be to en large the works in what was admittedly the most expensive centre in South Africa—where they had to pay the largest wages, and where it was impossible to have cheap work done by the Government printers. He admitted that a great deal of printing work had to be done at the administrative capital, but the point was, that apart from the work which admittedly had to be done there, there were huge quantities of work which could very well be done by competition elsewhere at much cheaper rates. And yet the Government were increasing the works. In 1910-11 there had been 230 artisans employed there, and in 1912-13 the number had increased to 347, or about 50 per cent. An amount of £15,000 was also down for an increase in the works at Pretoria, so that the Government’s policy was evidently to increase these works.

asked for information concerning “Garnet’s Thoughts on Teaching,” to which reference was made in the report of the Controller and Auditor-General in 1910. Then he wished to know the reason why the printing bill for the Free State voters’ list, in connection with the last election, was so high. The amount there was £3,241, as compared with £3,011 at the Cape, £1,012 in Natal, and £1,697 in the Transvaal.

asked the Minister whether it would not be desirable to start a branch of the Government Printing Works at Cape Town? It was evident that the firms here could not cope with the work. He did not agree with the hon. member for Cape Town, Gardens, that the work could be done more cheaply by private firms than the Government. It was useless to talk about competition in Cape Town, where there was only one tenderer. He also disagreed with the statement that the Government printer only gave information after being “corkscrewed”; he (the hon. member) thought that the official gave information most freely He did not agree that the private firms could do the work more cheaply. He pointed out that the vote must be reduced because they would not be printing Commission reports that had cost thousands of pounds. The best way of cheapening the cost of printing would be to instal more modern machinery in the works at Pretoria. Only a portion of the work was given to private firms now, and the result was that the Cape Town offices were choked. What would happen if all the work were given out to private firms at the Cape? In conclusion, he asked the Minister to give him some information with regard to promises given the staff of the Government Works, which had not been carried out.

said that in Maritzburg there were two daily papers published. Government work had been fairly well distributed between the two papers formerly, but one of these papers now belonged to a syndicate, who had been very constant supporters of the present Government, so this paper now got the whole of the work and the other paper, which was not a party paper at all, did not get any. This latter paper had sometimes criticised very severely anything which it took to be of the nature of jobbery, and the current idea was that on this account they had lost the contract, which had been given to the other paper. “Mr. Chairman,” continued the hon. member, “I would like to know if we are going in for a policy of ‘spoils’ in South Africa?”

pointed out that no department seemed to have any particular control over the head Government printer, who alone seemed to determine how many copies of Blue-books or other compilations should be printed. He thought it should not be left to this individual alone to decide the matter.

said in view of the large number of geological reports sent out, he would like to know the reason because very few people studied or read them, and they must be very expensive? Large plans were got out, beautifully executed, and it seemed to him a waste of money to distribute them so generously as had been done.

said that contracts had been given by the Government, to the “Cape Times,” particularly in Cape Town, for certain Government printing, and the conditions under which the contracts had been given, or one of the conditions, had been, and was, that in the event of the printing not being delivered to time, the remaining portion of the contract could be taken away from them and sent to the Government Printing Works, or elsewhere. What he wanted to bring to the notice of the committee and the Minister was the fact that—of course, no members of this House would accuse him of having any excessive love for the “Cape Times” or any of these contract firms—

Why not?

You may guess. But my concern is in seeing justice done. Proceeding, he said the facts were these, that in regard to certain of these contracts, the “Cape Times” had been able to supply the printing as required, vet the Government, presumably the Minister, had taken away a portion of the remaining portions of the contract and sent it to the Government Printing Works to be finished. That he did not think to be fair, and it might be capable of explanation He was particularly anxious to see justice done, thought it might be against his own principle of having more work done by the State.

said that in the Union Parliament they were proposing to spend a sum amounting to nearly a quarter of a million on stationery, and he put it to the Minister whether it would not be advisable to appoint a committee or Commission of some kind during the recess to inquire whether this enormous bill of expenditure on printing could not be in some way reduced. (Hear, hear.) He admitted fully the Language claim, Dutch and English, but he was quite certain that on both sides of the House there was a feeling that the printing which was done could, by some scientific examination, be enormously reduced in the interests of both languages. In regard to Mr. Knightly, the head of the Government Printing Works, he could bear testimony, and he was sure other members of the Public Accounts Committee could bear testimony, to the fact that Mr. Knightly gave his information in the fullest, freest and frankest manner. He said he could not account for it, but there were undoubtedly certain lines of printing which they were able to carry out more cheaply at Pretoria than had been contracted for at the coast and other places. He said pointblank to the committee that if he had printing works at the coast he would do work even cheaper than it was being done at present. He hoped that the Minister would not agree to give out all the printing work to contract. The best way was to keep the Government Printing Works going as nearly as possible in competition with outside firms, having regard to all the conditions, which must necessarily be done at top speed at Pretoria. It was work which could not very well be given out to contract, in fact it was work which must be There was a certain amount of printing done in the Government Printing Works. So long as the Parliamentary capital was at Cape Town, and so long as the Government had not its own printing works at Cape Town, there was a certain amount of printing which must necessarily be given out to contract, and he thought the line which the Government had taken at present was a sound one. They should keep their Government Printing Works in Pretoria and should keep them in active competition with the trade, so that the one might be a check on the other.

said that he could not see the object of having a geological survey made unless it was going to be mapped. These maps were exceedingly well done and exceedingly valuable.

said in the past the “Government Gazette” was sent free of charge to the Field-cornets and Justices of the Peace. This had had excellent effects, and he urged that that practice should be resumed.

said the object of discussing that vote was to try and get some information from the Government. He noticed there was only one Minister present although an important vote like that was being discussed. It was a delicate question which involved the two languages, but what was the use of discussing the matter when there was nobody present on the Government benches? He did not know whether hon. members were aware that the printing vote was more than the total revenue of the Transvaal. They could not go on like they were doing for ever. It was not sensible. He did not ask hon. members, or Ministers, to settle the question, but to leave it to sensible and independent officials to get rid of the incubus. Let them take the case of the publication of the laws. A member of the public had to pay 15s. for a copy because it was in two languages though only one was necessary. There should be a certain quantity in Dutch and a certain quantity in English. He believed the difficulty could be solved without hurting anybody’s feelings. He knew the hon. Minister opposite had got too much to do to find time to raise this question at the next meeting of the Cabinet. This matter, he maintained should be put into the hands of people who were unbiassed either one way or the other to find a way out of the difficulty of incurring this enormous expenditure every year. They would thus get a just settlement of a vexed question. A unanimous resolution had been taken by that House, and accepted by the Government, regarding certain returns of expenditure on this vote, but no notice had been taken of it. They were always hearing something about certain newspapers being supported by the Unionist party. But he would like to know how much interest the Government had in a certain newspaper. A case occurred some time ago in Pretoria when a distinction was made as between a Government organ and a farmers’ publication.

And the subsidy was given to newspapers which supported the Government politically, and it was not given to the non-political farmers’ organ, which was doing work for the country. He had nothing to do with that organ, yet he received a request from them last year to bring that matter up; but he did not do it because he did not want to cause any ill-feeling at that time. However, he thought there was no feeling now, an d he therefore now brought the matter forward, though a year late. The same complaint came from Natal, where people complained that here was a small newspaper, with a very small circulation, avowedly and designedly started to support the Government party. They got all the advertisements, and the old-established newspapers got none; but some of the latter published them gratis just to show that they were more broadminded than the others. By whom were these advertisements given, and to what papers? He thought they should have a return giving them all the information. If they had the names of the newspapers, then they would see how much impartiality there was about it.

said he would like to show to what a state of absurdity things had been reduced in connection with this bilingual printing. In a Blue-book—the annexures to the census returns—the word “viz.” was used, which he believed was a contraction from the Latin. It was translated into Dutch as “n.l.,” which he understood meant “namely.” There was no English about “viz.” at all, so why should they translate it in that way? The hon. member for Maritzburg, North, had drawn attention to the fact that almost a quarter of a million was being spent on stationery. He (Mr. Meyler) could show the Minister one way in which that amount could be reduced. Under the heading “stationery supplies,” £47,000 per annum was spent on stationery, and part of that stationery came to the House. If the Minister would make some rules, or would see that some rules were made in connection with the use of stationery by this House, and would prevent hon. members from using that stationery for circularising people to persuade them to buy one newspaper and not the others, he thought something would be saved. It was hardly credible that hon. members should do this, but the facts had come to their notice that it was being done.

said it was very late and they were all very tired, but they were here to conduct the business of the country, and they were voting a quarter of a million of money. They were voting £45,000 more for printing this year than they spent last year. The Government must, he recognised, have its headquarters at Pretoria, to execute urgent printing work, but he hoped that the Government would not extend the works at a place where wages were high. He hoped the policy would be continued of putting the work out to tender. The hon. member also alluded to the “Gazette” being sent out in both languages, and said that if a Dutch “Gazette” were sent to a person wanting the Dutch copy, and an English “Gazette” to a person wanting the English copy, a sum of £4,000 or £5,000, according to the Government printer, could be saved. He would commend that to the Minister, not only as far as the “Gazette” was concerned, but also as far as other papers were concerned. With regard to the giving out of advertisements, the Government had laid itself out to the charges now made, and if they had left it to the Tender Board they could have escaped these charges, because the Board gave the advertisements to the papers with the best circulations.

said that he did not want to speak at any length on that, because he was largely in agreement with the views which had fallen from the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (Mr. Orr) and the hon. member for Port Elizabeth, Central (Sir E. H. Walton) as to the Government Printing Works There was no intention to extend these works to such an extent as to do all the Government work; but, at the same time, it was in the public interest to have these Government Printing Works. (Hear, hear.)

Continuing, he said that he was waiting for a report on the subject before deciding on any other course of action. With regard to the return concerning advertising in newspapers which was asked for by the hon. member for Von Brandis, and which was not placed on the table last session, he would like to say that there was no intention on his part to be discourteous. The fact was that instructions were given for compiling the return, but by the time the session closed, the return had not been completed. There were a large number of small amounts involved, and it was found impossible to get the return ready. He would like to say, however, that if the return were now ready, he would be pleased to place it upon the table. With regard to advertising, he would like to say that the papers which made the most out of the Government in this direction were papers which did not support the policy of the Government.

That is the truth hut there is differentiation in one case.

said that it was very hard to avoid even the appearance of favouritism. He thought that when the return was laid on the table, hon. members would be surprised at the results. Dealing with the cost of printing, he said that the natural conditions of the country and the dual language was responsible, to a large extent, for the expenditure. With regard to the dual language, it was difficult to find a solution.

Why not make a beginning?

said that again a large part of the expenditure was due to the large amount of printing for the purposes of Parliament. Whatever was printed had to be printed in two languages. The same quantity was not printed in each language. With regard to the “Agricultural Journal,” he would point out that for every Dutch copy that was printed, eight or nine English copies were printed. They tried to find out the public demand for these things.

Why not take the “Gazette” in hand?

It is a very difficult matter.

said he had shifted a great pile of Bluebooks from his desk, and he had not even opened them. (An hon. member: “Shame.”) If they gave him 48 hours a day he could read them, but at present he could not, and he did not think that anybody else could. Each person was receiving two Bills and two “Government Gazettes” under the present system. There might be certain things which must be published side by side in both languages, but there were heaps of things which it was not necessary to give to everybody in both languages. With regard to the “Government Gazette” alone four or five thousand pounds could be saved. It would be better to spend the money in agriculture than to waste it in unnecessary printing. It was not a political, language, or racial question, but a business one. The way the matter was working now was to the detriment of everyone.

said that with regard to the “Government Gazette” the change that had been suggested was not feasible. Public notices and many legal notifications had to be given in both languages, otherwise legal difficulties might arise. He (the Minister) sat there knowing both languages, but his hon. friend the member for Kroonstad knew only the Dutch language; in other words, farmers would have to have both English and Dutch copies, and every member who wanted to do his duty would have to have both English and Dutch copies beside him. The practice might be expensive, but it was really indispensable.

pointed out that he only knew the English language, and did not understand Dutch. An hon. member: “Therefore you can’t judge.”) The hon. Minister said it was necessary for him to have a Dutch copy in order to understand it, but as he did not understand Dutch, the Dutch copy was not the slightest use to him. If an hon. member knew both languages then he could understand the application, but the great difficulty would lie in a case like that of the hon. member for Kroonstad and himself.

He hoped that hon. members opposite would understand that hon. members on his side of the House, in speaking on this question, had no desire to get behind the settlement made at the Convention.

We know.

said that it seemed to him that some arrangement should be made to minimise the expense which was entailed by all this printing. Did hon. members realise that the cost of the printing was only £65,000 less than the cost of administering the whole of the native affairs of this country? The expenditure was enormous, and he hoped that some settlement would be found.

said that he agreed with the hon. member who had just spoken. It was not a question of language, it was a mere matter of convenience. He failed to follow the arguments of the Minister of Justice. Not knowing Dutch, the double copy of Bills was not of the slightest use to him. What was the good of having everything duplicated? It was not done in the Transvaal Parliament, and he never heard of any inconvenience caused. The whole matter was one of convenience and expense. For instance, take the Votes and Proceedings Hon. members who understood English got the English copy and Dutch members got the Dutch copy, and he thought that the same thing could apply in the case of Bills. It certainly seemed to him that something ought to be done in order to save the appalling expense to which they were put unnecessarily.

said that some members opposite who only understood one language did not quite appreciate the position of hon. members on his side of the House who understood two languages. As a matter of convenience they required Bills and the “Gazette” in both languages. (An Opposition member: “Why?”) He had not a legal training, and over and over again he had found that he had to refer from the one copy to the other in order to elucidate points. It was necessary from a legal point of view and from a public point of view that Bills and the “Gazette” should be published in both languages. For instance, the “Gazette” was supplied to Magistrates and Field-cornets, and it was necessary to have it in both languages.

agreed with what had been said by hon. members on his side that it was incumbent upon the Government to come to a decision as to what amount of printing was necessary. He would not say how it could be done, but he knew it could be done without hurting the susceptibilities of members on either side of the House. With regard to the printing of Bills in both languages he thought that the present system was the best one, because both languages were authoritative. He would say the same thing in regard to the Statutes. Both versions were authoritative, and the Court sometimes referred to both to see how the law was expressed. But he did think with regard to Bills the present system was a very convenient one, though it might be costly. With regard to the “Gazette,” he did not think the same argument applied. If the “Gazette” were printed in each language in sufficient numbers to supply the subscribers it would meet the case.

said that in connection with the double printing and the expenditure the case might be overstated because the expense really arose in the translating and setting up of the type. Whether they printed 100 or 150 copies in Dutch, or in Dutch and English, the extra expense involved was small. The extra paper used was a small item.

said one of the great claims of both sections of the community was that both languages should have equal rights. He held that the present system was of great assistance to those members who did not know English well, and personally he had learned a lot in this manner. He urged hon. members to leave the matter as it was. He was especially pleased that no attacks against the Dutch language had been made. The hon. member for Pretoria had criticised the present system, but he had not pointed out how the expenses could be reduced.

said it appeared to him that they could go on discussing the question ad infinitum, but he did think the Government should take into consideration the question of how far it was possible to avoid unnecessary printing in both languages.

said the hon. member for Vrededorp was under a misapprehension. There was no suggestion to diminish the rights of the Dutch language. He still thought they should publish separate copies in Dutch and English, so that it would not be necessary to buy both unless it were so desired.

said the Act of Union provided that copies of Acts should be published in both languages. He thought, however, it would be far better to follow as far as possible the practice adopted as in the case of the “Agricultural Gazette,” where a person could purchase a copy in each language. He personally would like to have both copies, not to educate himself as the hon. member—(“Oh”)—but for the sake of convenience.

Progress was reported, and leave obtained to sit again tomorrow.