moved that the forty-third Order of the Day, adjourned debate on motion on conditions of employment of daily-paid white men along the railways to be resumed, be discharged.

seconded.

The motion was agreed to, and the Order accordingly discharged.

as chairman, brought up the fifth report of the Select Committee on Waste Lands, as follows:

Your committee beg to report that they have had under consideration the papers referred to them, and beg to recommend the grants, etc., of land, as set forth in the accompanying schedule (A. 10—’12), viz.: (1) Grant, for church, at Kuruman; (2) grant, for cemetery, at Cala; (3) lease, for whaling station, at Gouritz River (recommended owing to the fact that the application was received by and recommended to the Government before the recommendation set forth in the third report of the committee was passed); (4) sale of drill hall site (Lot 17) at Cathcart (in the event of the same not being required by the Department of Defence).

With reference to the petitions from J. J. de Lange and V. G. Fenner Solomon, referred to your committee on the 10th instant, your committee are of opinion that these petitions do not fall within the terms of reference, and that consequently they are unable to deal therewith. Your committee, however, recommend that the petitions in question be referred to the Government for consideration.

In the absence of sufficient information your committee are unable to make any recommendations with reference to the following papers, viz.: (a) Grant to Berlin Mission Society of site for a mission chapel at Windsorton; (b) grant to Amalinda Village Management Board of excess width of a thoroughfare for sale purposes.

Your committee are unable to recommend the grant of a site for whaling purposes at Kromme Bay to H. F. Matfield.

The schedule was ordered to be printed, and the report set down for consideration in Committee of the Whole House tomorrow.

as acting chairman, brought up the seventh report of the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants, and Gratuities. They recommended the refund to C. M. Dewes, in monthly instalments of £5 each, of the contributions to the Cape Civil Service Pension Fund by H. C. Dewes, formerly mail officer; the award to the widow of the late W. Duthie, constable, of a gratuity of £50; the award to P. M. Sheehan, formerly gaoler, of an amount representing 90 days’ full pay leave; that an extra statutory pension at the rate of £59 8s. 6d. be granted to W. J. Higley, formerly Controller of Railway Telegraphs. With reference to the petitions and papers referred to them, relating to relief to the dependants of the victims of the recent Table Bay disaster, they recommended the award to M. A. S. Stanley of a pension of £18 per annum, L. Pengelly £15 per annum, J. C. Schietekat £12 per annum, E. J. C. Broad of a gratuity of £15, and E. S. Pluke of a gratuity of £10.

They further recommended that breaks be condoned in the service of M. F. van der Merwe, teacher, of J. F. W. Crankshaw, teacher, of V A. Miller, teacher, and of A. E. Lean, teacher.

They were unable, to recommend that the prayers of the following petitions be entertained: J. N. Taljaard, G. McGarrity, B. M. Lacey, C. C. Stubbs, L. V. Bikitsha, E. R. A. Green, A. Macdougall, M. Hogan, I.J. Bosman, J. A. Bester, E. J. W. Wilken, C. J. J. van Rensburg, J. L. Knight, N. Kleingeld, D. Murray, M. Power, G. R. von Wielligh, W. P. Erasmus, W. Ross, E. A. Ward, D. J. L. van Blommestein, F. J. Bezuidenhout, J. Mons, J. A. E. Markus, B. B. Mutlow, G. J. Bubb, A. Edmondson, J. J. Screech, E. C. J. Brand.

With reference to the petition of P. Hertslet, the committee were of opinion that the subject matter thereof did not fall within the scope of the terms of reference to the committee.

With reference to the petition of W. Clift and 23 others, the committee were of opinion that the application for relief should be deferred until such time as petitioners retire.

With reference to the petition of W. F. de Clerk and J. C. Pretorius, together with supporting petition from C. H. Boshoff and 66 others, the committee were unable to make any recommendation in the case of W. F. de Clerk as the matter is sub judice between the Department of Lands and petitioner.

As to the prayer of J. C. Pretorius, the committee were unable to recommend that it be entertained.

The report was ordered to be considered in Committee of the Whole House tomorrow.

as chairman, brought up the second report of the Select Committee on Native Affairs as follows:

Your committee, having had under consideration the papers, referred to them, relating to the following matters: (1) Reservation of a portion of Native Reserve No. 21, Zululand, for the purpose of a public outspan; (2) application by Mr. C. B. Boast to acquire a portion of Drakensberg Location, No. 1, Natal; and (3) reservation and allotment of lands at Impala, Natal, beg to report as follows: (1) Your committee recommend the reservation of a portion of Zululand Native Reserve No. 21, division of Eshowe, in extent about 100 acres, for the purpose of a public outspan at Inyoni railway station, in exchange for an adjoining area of Crown land about 200 acres in extent, subject to the payment of compensation to natives for improvements valued at £30. (2) Your committee have considered the application of Mr. C. B. Boast to acquire a portion of Drakensberg Location No. 1, division of Estcourt, in extent about 500 acres, adjoining his farm, Hillside, for the sum of £500, and are unable to recommend that the application be granted. (3) Your committee find that the matter of the Impapala lands has engaged the attention of the late Natal Government for some years; that representations were made from time to time by the people concerned, and that eventually with a view to the introduction of a form of individual tenure the lands were surveyed into suitable allotments, the intention being to grant leases of such allotments for a period of twenty-one years, and that the survey had been carried out under instructions issued prior to Union. The rental proposed to be charged was £1 per annum for each lot of ten acres and 2s. for each additional acre, the maximum area proposed to be allotted being thirty, and the minimum ten, acres for garden lots, and for building lots a maximum of three acres and a minimum of two-thirds of an acre. A recommendation to this effect was approved by the Zululand Native Trust on the 15th March, 1910. The people concerned are in actual occupation of the land and have made improvements thereon. No leases have as yet been granted. Your committee beg to recommend: (a) The reservation of this area, in extent about 2,638 acres, for the purpose of a native settlement; (b) the granting of certificates of occupation to approved native applicants, subject to payment by them of the survey expenses and a rental of 2s. per acre per annum, and to such other conditions as will afford security of tenure pending legislation defining a system under which lands may be occupied or granted in native areas.

The report was ordered to be considered to-morrow.

as chairman, brought up the third report of the Select Committee on Native Affairs as follows:

Your committee beg to report that they have considered the memorandum on native taxation in the Provinces of the Union of South Africa, referred to them, and have taken evidence with reference thereto. Your committee recommend that further consideration of this subject be postponed until next session of Parliament.

The report was ordered to be considered to-morrow.

Return showing details of amounts paid to certain newspapers for advertising and printing, 1st June to 31st December, 1910; Fourth annual report of the Commissioners of the Land and Agricultural Loan Fund, Natal, twelve months ended 31st March,

said he had been looking into the matter which had been brought to his notice. He had explained that it was not possible to give workmen compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act under certain clauses of the Bill. They could not have both, but he thought it was fair that an officer should remain entitled to the general benefits under this Act, then, although he had obtained compensation under this Workmen’s Compensation Act, if an officer accepted such compensation, he should still have the privileges of a public servant. He would move, therefore, that the proviso be deleted, and the following new proviso be inserted: “Provided that in the case of any such officer or defendant, who elects to exercise the right to actually obtain compensation under any such law, the provisions of sections 46, 47, 49 and 50 of this Act shall not apply.”

said that he did not rise to throw any obstacles in the way of the Minister getting his Bill through; but this proviso was quite a new thing. He could understand it in the case of an engine-driver, but not in the case of a clerk. It did not seem to be right, and it might lead them into trouble. He did not know if the Minister had sufficiently considered the bearings of the clause. He had known of cases, and very pitiful cases too, in which men had died from occupational diseases, and all claims had been objected to as being contrary to law. However generous they might be to these people, they should also be just to the general body of taxpayers.

said that in view of the Minister’s proviso he would not press his, although he thought it would have been better if the Minister had waited until a general law of compensation for the whole of the Union had been introduced. He wished to point out to the right hon. gentleman the member for Victoria West (Mr. J. X. Merriman) that it was not a new thing for State employees to be entitled to compensation. They had had a Workmen’s Compensation Act in the Cape Province since 1905 which applied to servants of the Crown. Section 5 of the Act specifically stated that the Act should apply to servants of the Crown. That clause was still on the Statute Book, and Civil Servants in the Cape were entitled to rely upon it. As the Minister had substantially met his point, he would withdraw his proviso.

With leave of the committee, the amendment was withdrawn.

The proviso of the Minister of the Interior was agreed to.

The Select Committee’s amendment accordingly dropped.

On clause 49,

said that he wished to draw the Minister’s attention to the fact that in clause 75 he made provision for the making of regulations, and therefore this section was unnecessary.

On new clause 59,

On the motion of Mr. ORR,

put the amendment proposed by the Select Committee, in line 11, after “contract” to omit all the words down to “satisfactory” in line 16, and to substitute “no advancement within a grade, or promotion from grade to grade, shall be permitted in the case of any officer unless the Commission is satisfied, having regard to the amount and importance of his work and his efficiency and good conduct, that he is entitled to receive it.”

said that he wished to draw attention to the fact that the Select Committee had moved out certain words, and he wished to re-insert them. He said that by omitting these words they would throw the whole responsibility on the Public Service Committee of seeing that certificates for increments of pay were submitted to them and approved of by them before they were granted. He put it to the Minister that that was totally unnecessary. He considered that the certificate should be granted by the heads of the departments concerned, who would transmit them to the Auditor-General as evidence that the advances of salaries had been duly authorised, and the Auditor-General would pass the increases. If the House accepted the deletion of the words, it would throw an enormous burden and quite unnecessary labour upon the Public Service Commission.

said that the reason for the alteration was that the Public Service Commission was an impartial body. The Select Committee felt that if the matter were left to the heads of departments, it might be possible that some officials would be promoted and others not.

said that the Public Service Commission would not be able to deal with the enormmous amount of certificates annually. The Commission would either pass them mechanically or call up the heads of departments to ask them “Why have you recommended these promotions?” They might pass the clause, but they would find that it would not work in practice.

said that he supported the amendment of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg, North. He believed that the words were originally put in the belief that they were consequential upon an amendment which had been previously moved, but it was pointed out to the Select Committee that these words were unnecessary, and they were deleted. He quite agreed with the hon. member (Mr. Orr) that if the words were not re-inserted, they would throw a great burden and a great deal of unnecessary work on the shoulders of the Public Service Commission.

said that he could not accept the view given by the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg, North (Mr. Orr). He was afraid that if the matter were left to the heads of departments, they would pass the certificates purely mechanically. One head might get the reputation of giving his men increases of pay every year, and he would be extremely popular, but another head, perhaps more conscientious, might differentiate and become exceedingly unpopular, and the result would be that heads would recommend all their men for increases of pay. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg, North, was afraid that the Public Service Commission would be overworked if they had this work to do, but the fear he thought of some people was that the Public Service Commission might not have quite enough to do. (Hear, hear.) In fact, the view was held by some that possibly in years to come one Commissioner might be able to do all the work. The Select Committee gave the power in question to the Public Service Commission, because it was an independent body.

said the proposal of the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg, North, did not take the power out of the hands of the Commissioners, but insisted that they should have before them the reports of the heads of departments.

said the hon. member did the Commission an injustice. The members of the Commission must be given credit for having some common sense. How could they deal with these things except through heads of departments?

The amendment made by the Select Committee was agreed to.

On clause 53,

moved that the words “an Act of Parliament” be substituted for “a resolution of the House of Assembly.” The clause put the Civil Service at the mercy of a snatch majority. In the old Cape House of Assembly there was a great debate on a proposal he had the misfortune to father to reduce the salaries of the Civil Servants. It was then argued that these people had contract with the Government, and when the Bill was carried there were rumblings and threatenings about legal proceedings, which might have proved very expensive and troublesome. But that was a very different thing to putting the Civil Servants at the mercy of a resolution of the House of Assembly, for an Act of Parliament had to be considered by both Houses, and it afforded some protection which was not given by the adoption of a mere resolution of one House. The Assembly might pass resolutions in a moment of passion which it might be sorry for afterwards. He had known such things happen.

said Government could bring in an Act of Parliament without having authority to do so in the present Bill. That was what the hon. member for Victoria West did in the Cape.

said his hon. friend and others hotly contested that Act. The matter did not go to the Courts of Law, but it might have been taken there, and if the matter had been taken home to England and been argued before the Privy Council no one could have said what the result would have been. Some of the Civil Servants joined the Service under a contract, which the Government broke.

said he agreed with the principle of the right hon. gentleman, but his (Sir Edgar’s) objection to the amendment was that it would necessitate a very prolonged debate on an exceedingly painful subject. If the right hon. gentleman had not been able to make out an overwhelming case for the reduction he had referred to, the Cape Parliament would never have agreed to it.

said it was quite right that there should be long and painful discussions, for they would be dealing with the fortunes and livelihood of 60,000 people. Was that a matter lightly to be dealt with in an afternoon’s discussion? What wore they there for except to have painful discussions? (Laughter.) Discussions gave him the greatest pain, but that was what a Parliament was for.

feared that in a weak moment a Government might be tempted, on the eve of an election, to avoid additional taxation by reducing Civil Servants’ salaries.

They are not likely to do that.

said he supported the amendment of the right hon. member for Victoria West.

also supported the amendment. If the subject were painful to discuss, that would not be so painful as it would be to the members of the Civil Service to have their salaries reduced.

said that in the old Cape House there was a clause in their statutes which provided that no Civil Servant should be removed without the concurrence of both Houses of Parliament. When that was passed it was thought that the Civil Servants were quite safe. But what happened in practice? There were wholesale reductions on the ground of “re-organisation,” and the House knew practically nothing about these removals. The thing took place in committee. There was no discussion. True, there was the concurrence of both Houses of Parliament, but it was a mere matter of form. He hoped the amendment of the right hon. gentleman would be adopted.

in supporting the amendment, referred to what took place in connection with the railways towards the end of last session, when a number of railway servants were retired, and he did not think there was a single member of the House, except the Minister, who knew how many were being reduced, who knew the names of a, single officer, or knew in the least why the Minister was moving the resolution.

said that, no doubt, it would be a very difficult matter to get an Act through that House. In any case hon. members must bear in mind that ultimately an Act of Parliament was necessary. Every general reduction in the service must be in the Estimates and must pass through the House. There must be an Appropriation Act. He would not object to a resolution of both Houses of Parliament in place of the present proposal of a resolution of the House of Assembly. As there would have to be an Appropriation Act ultimately in any case, he did not think they need say there that there should be a Bill.

said that an Appropriation Act would not be discussed in the same way as an ordinary Act of Parliament. Members of the Civil Service must feel that only under the gravest financial stress would their emoluments be disturbed. It would be unfair that the salaries and emoluments of Civil Servants should be touched without the fullest discussion in that House, such as they would obtain if a Bill were necessary.

said he would like to put it to the Minister whether, if they made this subject to a resolution of both Houses, they were not giving to the Senate a power which they did not at present enjoy? If they gave the Senate a power which they had not got at present, they might be creating a precedent which in the future might be extremely dangerous.

said that one point in favour of the amendment was that in the Estimates or an Appropriation Act it was not in the power of private members to increase the items one single jot.

in supporting the amendment, said that they were dealing with thousands of employees of the State, and he felt that it was the duty of that House to safeguard these people. If they confined this to a resolution of Parliament the temptation during times of stress to reduce the salaries of the Civil Service would be all the greater because it could be more easily accomplished.

said that a step such as this would be equivalent to a repudiation of our debts.

said he thought it was right, if they were going to reduce the salaries of the Civil Servants, that they should proceed by Act of Parliament.

said he hoped the Minister would seriously consider whether they were going to give additional powers to the Senate. It seemed to him that they were asking the other House to do something in connection with a money Bill if they said that this should be subject to a resolution of both Houses.

said he hoped the Minister would accept the amendment. He referred to what took place under the Administration of the right hon. gentleman in the Cape in 1908 under a provision in the Statute that there should be a concurrence of both Houses.

said his hon. friend should not confuse the two matters. One was the forcible retirement of Civil Servants. That was an unfortunate necessity, but it was a necessity, and in this Act they had given power to the Government to do that, safeguarding to the Civil Servants their compensation or allowances. They retired people and threw more work on those that remained, and that would, he was sure, only be done in case of dire necessity.

said that the point of the hon. member (Col. Crewe) was perfectly clear, that under the Cape Act there was apparently a provision to safeguard the right of Civil Servants in that reorganisation should not take place without the concurrence of both Houses. It was true they were dealing now with what was called retirement, but the question was what consideration this House would give if this question were dealt with by resolution, instead of by Act of Parliament.

said his position had been taken from the latter portion of the clause. Hon. members must understand there might come a time of great difficulty, and officers were paid on scales, but even in such a time their increments would move up, unless an Act of Parliament were first passed.

pointed out that nobody desired to touch the latter portion. It was only the general reduction of pay that they were dealing with. The Governor-General-in-Council frequently took the responsibility for the latter part, but the other part should be dealt with by an Act of Parliament, and not by a resolution. In every case in Australia, where they reduced the pay of their Civil Servants, it was invariably done by an Act of Parliament.

I will accept the amendment. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. J. X. Merriman’s amendment was agreed to.

On clause 54,

moved: In line 56, to omit “appoint,” and to substitute “authorise”; and in line 62, to omit “appointed” and to substitute “authorised”.

Agreed to.

On clause 55,

moved: In line 5, after “admission to” to insert “or promotion in”; and in line 25, to omit “two divisions” and to substitute “administrative clerical or general divisions”.

Agreed to.

On clause 56.

moved: In line 54, to omit “Chapter III. of.”

Agreed to.

On clause 57,

On the motion of the MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR,

put the new sub-section (2).

pointed out that prior to Union in the Transvaal people had been recruited for the police under the conditions or the Transvaal Act. They had a contract with these men, which had been carried out, but under the circumstances they could not make provision as the Bill stood. The Minister then moved: In line 18, before “subordinate,” to insert “those” and to add at the end of the sub-section: “Provided that if any such member or subordinate officer has been appointed since the thirty-first day of May, 1910, but prior to the commencement of this Act, under any law or statutory regulation, the provisions of Chapter III. shall not apply to him, but he shall have the same rights in respect of pension, and on the same conditions, as were applicable to other such members or subordinate officers appointed prior to the thirty-first day of May, 1910, under the same law or regulation.”

suggested that the clause should stand over and the proposed amendment put on the paper.

asked the Minister if the clause involved any increase of expenditure?

The amount has been given.

I am prepared to allow the clause to stand over. I move accordingly.

The motion was agreed to On clause 59,

moved: Page 66, after line 15, to insert the following definition: “the Commission”

shall mean the Public Service Commission appointed under this Act.

Agreed to.

asked the Minister whether it was not necessary to define the word “Administration” as referred to in this Bill.

I can’t allow you.

On the first schedule,

said that he wished to raise an objection to the title of clerical assistance. He did not know why they did not use the good old English word “clerk.” “Clerical assistance” conveyed the impression that it was an inferior position to that of a clerk. He did not see why they should not have principal clerk, senior clerk, and clerk. He would suggest to the Minister that he should substitute the word “clerk” for “clerical assistant” at another stage.

said that it was rather inviduous for a private member to move a reduction in the scale of salaries as fixed in the schedule, but in order to be consistent with the remarks made by some hon. members on his side of the House with regard to the expenditure now being incurred and also with regard to Ministers’ salaries, he felt it necessary to take the opinion of the House on the subject of officers’ salaries, and move a reduction. His point was that the Union of South Africa could not pay the present scale of salaries which was included in the schedule. It could not continue to pay Ministers their present high salaries, and it could not continue to pay salaries to the higher officials which were on a higher level than they should be because of the Ministers’ high salaries.

No, they are not.

said that that was the only justification for these high salaries being paid to the high officials. There was no justification for the course the Government was pursuing, and he would, therefore, move that the first grades be reduced from £1,300 to £1,000 and (from £1,500 to £1,200. The country could not continue to pay; it was not going to continue to pay, and, furthermore, the House should not put officers in a wrong position. If his amendment were accepted he would move further reductions in the other grades.

said that he wanted to know what position Magistrates held under this Bill. He had been addressed by one or two on the subject, because, unfortunately, he represented a constituency where magistrates were in a peculiarly unfortunate position. Some of them were stationed 80 or 90 miles away from the railway, and it was very hard for them to be kept there simply because they were efficient. They were, he was glad to say, a most efficient class of people. (Hear, hear.) One of them had been living in a far-away part for the last five years. He was living upon a very small salary in a place where, probably, the Minister himself would not choose to live. He was kept there, but he was efficient. That was the worst of it. He knew of another magistrate who was kept up in the North-west because he was efficient. He did not quite grasp the position of magistrates under this Bill and he would like to have some explanation from the Minister. The Minister might make some authoritative declaration that the magistrates would be taken into consideration.

All the highest salaries were paid to men living in the most comfortable spots, spots where anybody would be willing to live in, whereas out in the desert the magistrates had to do with very small salaries. Their position was a great deal worse than that of men living in comfortable places in large towns, because in large towns there were other people to entertain, whereas in the outside places a great deal of the entertaining that had to be done fell upon the shoulders of the magistrates. He was not one who advocated increased expenditure, but he thought the expenditure was not properly shared. If the Minister looked into the matter, he would find many cases where poor fellows lived in places where the Minister himself would not like to live in all his life They were efficient, but they were forgotten.

said that magistrates did not fall under the grades in the first schedule. They had special grades. These grades in the first schedule applied only to the central service.

But where do the magistrates come in? I can’t find them.

Special grades will have to be made for them; they are a special class. They are not under the central service; entirely special grades are made for them all through the Union. Proceeding, he said they had a very Large number of grades, which did not appear under this schedule. They had only put in grades which were more or less typical of the grades existing in the central service. As to the amendment of his hon. friend the member for Port Elizabeth, Central, he would ask Him not to press it, because he could not conceive of a greater blow being struck at the efficiency of the service than reducing the salaries of heads of the departments.

If they considered the enormous amount of highly responsible work that was done by the heads of departments with similar work done by private employees, and compared the salaries, they would be surprised how favourably the latter compared with the former. There was a case of an officer drawing £800 under the Government who had taken a post in private employ at £1,500 a year and a free house.

And pension rights? (Laughter.)

No. Proceeding, General Smuts said that the efficiency of the service depended not only on an able Government but on able heads of departments. If not adequately paid, a good man would leave, and the result would be that for the sake of a few thousand pounds they would probably disorganise the service. He would pay good salaries, because they wanted to attract to these posts the best talent they had in South Africa. (Hear, hear.) The Select Committee most thoroughly discussed the list, and found that it was not possible to arrange the grades on a different basis.

said that as the Select Committee had been introduced, he would have nothing more to say. (Laughter.) That was the last word. They had one brilliant young economist on the Select Committee, and he (Mr. Merriman) supposed that he voiced his views. However, he hoped there would be a reconsideration of the scale laid down in the Estimates for the magistrates, and that due consideration would be paid to those people who lived in outside places. In contrast with them, there was the nice, agreeable young fellow who played lawn tennis, was a nice young man at a tea party; he came under the eye of a Minister, was put forward, and then he got a knighthood. (Loud laughter.) But people ten times more efficient had to bear the heat and burden of the day. Unfortunately, he (Mr. Merriman) had never been in a position to reward them; the only way he had rewarded them was to knock 5 per cent. off their salaries.

said he wished to associate himself with the remarks of the right hon. member for Victoria West.

said that every word that the right hon. member for Victoria West said was thoroughly justified. The evil referred to should be remedied, and more consideration shown to those men who were sent to outside districts.

agreed that salaries paid to magistrates in out-of-the-way places was inadequate.

said he could not fully endorse the statement that the schedule was fully discussed by the Select Committee. The arguments that good salaries should be paid to the heads of departments because the work was important and responsible, was also an argument against paying high salaries to the Ministers, for if the important and responsible work were transacted by the heads of departments, there was not much for the Ministers to do.

said he understood the difficulty the Select Committee felt was the impossibility of scheduling magistrates. Would it be within the province of the Civil Service Commission to make recommendations as to the salaries of the magistrates? As a rule, the magistrates who were sent to out-of-the-way places were very good men, who were prevented from coming under the personal notice of the heads of departments. Some of the magistrates, like the one at Walfisch Bay, were almost forgotten, owing to their being kept in one place so long. A magistrate in an outlying district was a most responsible official, because he was really the representative of the Government. He hoped provision would be made for magistrates on the same basis as the scale in the Bill, for some magistrates drew salaries which did not enable them to keep up their positions as representatives of the Government.

said the time of the Select Committee was exceedingly limited, and it had a signally difficult task before it. The committee had an enormous task in going through this Bill, and it was impossible to discuss every detail as thoroughly as they might have done if they had had more time, but they wished to avoid jeopardising the prospect of this Bill coming before the House again. He thought, as far as magistrates were concerned, that adequate protection had been given, though, of course, a schedule would have to be drawn up. Colonel Crewe added that, as regarded the schedule itself, every member would be at perfect liberty to vote just as he pleased, because there was no actual recommendation from the Select Committee on that.

said he hoped the committee would hesitate before accepting the amendment of the hon. member. He thought what they wanted, now that the work of the Union was so important as it was, was to have the very best men they could get as heads of departments. Providing they were going to get, as they all hoped to get under this Bill, a service where promotion was made by merit and every effort was made to attract the best men they could find and not merely men who were qualified on other grounds, he did not think that these rates were too much to pay for these positions. He thought the way in which money could be saved in the public administration was not by reducing a few large salaries like these of the heads of departments. The waste of public money did not take place in the salaries of a few men at the head of the service. They would save more public money by encouraging these men who were at the head of the departments than by any amount of cutting down in their salaries.

said he would like to associate himself with the remarks of the hon. member for Fordsburg. In considering the amount to be paid to these officers, the Secretaries of Departments of State, as they were called, he thought they should bear in mind, in the first place, that these were the only officers who were stationed in Pretoria who did not receive any local allowance. Then there was a further important consideration, and it was this, that they had completely altered the pension system and the pension rights of these officers. In the old Cape Administration they had two permanent heads who were receiving £1,200 a year After forty years’ service, they were entitled to a pension of two-thirds of their salary, £800. They had contributed 3 per cent of their salaries to the Pension Fund. Now under these proposals these heads would be living in Pretoria; they would make a contribution of 4 per cent. to the Pension Fund, and they were going to give them, as the basis of their pensions, not one-sixtieth for each year of their service on the average of the last three years, but one-sixtieth for every year’s service on the average of their salaries for the last 30 years. Taking everything into consideration, he did not think any public officer under this scheme may look forward to-day to receiving by way of pension more than half-pay. He did not think that, taking all into consideration, they were putting these salaries too high.

said that he would like to associate himself with every word said by the hon. member for Fordsburg When they looked at the bulk of the Service in the lower grades, those salaries certainly not excessive. The House would be pursuing a policy of very false economy if it attempted to out down what may be described as the plums of the service.”

said he did not think it was very real economy to spend more money than they had got. They were voting salaries which they could not pay. Hon. members must remember that they were going to have to face taxation to a certainty and when this House was asked to pay, as it must be next year, to meet this higher scale of salaries, the position was one that he thought the House should keep in mind now. The House had fixed salaries on the highest scale and it was not paying its way. The Government figures were even worse than they were given to them in the Budget. Every day almost Ministers were getting up and announcing that the Governor-General had assented to further estimates of expenditure. The deficit was going to be greater than was shown in the Budget, and next year the Government was not going to have the whole of these resources of revenue which it had this year. They had tried to the best of their ability to get the Government to reduce expenditure. They had asked them to pause before they passed this scale of expenditure on the ground that they would not be able to maintain it.

said he thought that Magistrates should have been included in the schedule, as well as in section 1. True, they would have the Magistrates’ salaries in the Estimates, but they had no power in the Estimates to increase salaries. They had no say whatever in determining what the emoluments of these officers should be. There was also the matter of the local allowance A list was given. He thought that list should have included the officers in the Transkeian Territories. He would like to ask at what time and in what way this House was to be able to come to a vote to decide on these local allowances, whether they should be laid down in the memorandum?

The amendment was negatived.

On the second schedule,

moved to alter the first line in the fourth column of the second schedule so that it would read “sections 1, 9, 13, and 24.” He moved this because it seemed to him that it was only right that people who went in for law examinations should be allowed to do so, but as the section stood they were cut out from doing so.

The amendment was agreed to.

Progress was reported, and leave granted to sit again on Monday.

said when the debate was adjourned he was endeavouring to show that the methods provided in this Bill were by no means the only or the best methods that could be provided for keeping Asiatics out of the country. He pointed out that Australia, although there they had similar legislation, did not rely upon that solely to keep Asiatics out of the Commonwealth. At the present time white immigrants were pouring into Australia at the rate of something like 100,000 a year. They knew if they could get enough white people to populate Australia they would never fear the Asiatics. Proceeding, the hon. member pointed out that in making these drastic regulations against the entry of Asiatics, they were making it more difficult for eligible white people to come into the country. He was quite sure that there had been a great deal of wrongdoing—he did not mean that anything unlawful had taken place, but the administration of existing laws had been conducted very harshly indeed, and many men who would have been of great use in developing South Africa had been kept out. While the Minister was endeavouring to place restrictions upon Asiatics, he was at the same time giving further power into the hands of the Immigration Department to harass white people who desired to settle in the country. Again, the education test was peculiar, because it gave the officer the power to test a man in other than European languages. He did not think they should allow Sanscrit or Turkish to be given as a test. He could understand the alarm that was caused among the Jewish community. He thought these people had been dealt harshly within the past. It was surely never contemplated that the Jewish people would be treated as Asiatics when they desired to enter South Africa. He thought, the remark of the hon. member for Vrededorp the other day was unnecessarily harsh. They might all take a lesson from Jewish methods, because since the days of Cromwell these people had taken care of their sick, seen that their dead were properly buried, and in every way endeavoured to prevent their people becoming a burden to the State. He would be sorry if the Jewish people were to be treated as, or thought of as, something in the nature of undesirables.

This legislation was as unfair to the general taxpayer as it was to the Asiatics, who, of course, he honestly desired to see kept out of the country This legislation was costly to the taxpayers in the way of litigation—in enforcing the Law. If they definitely stated in the Bill that they would not allow Asiatics to come into the country, then me taxpayer would be saved a good deal of money, and the Asiatic would recognise the futility of contesting the law. The existing laws had not worked well. He wished to state a case of hardship to the Minister. When he was in England he met a carpenter who had come out to South Africa, but was prohibited from landing. He had no work to come to, but he was an excellent workman and a man of good character. He was stopped because he could not satisfy the Immigration Officer that he had sufficient means, or that he had work to go to. He had saved up £50, cut of which he spent £32 in passage money, all of which was wasted because he was returned to England. He considered that such cases could be obviated if the Minister would make provision by which people in England could go to the agent in London, and, after satisfying him that they were in a position to comply with this Bill, obtain permits to enter the country. He wished to ask the Minister whether he would give more than a casual glance at the amendments which he and his colleagues had put on the paper with reference to Contract labour. If hon. members would think it out, they would see that it was not fair to boys born in this country, who learned their trades in this country, that they should see all the chances of advancement and all opportunities of employment, which were naturally theirs, constantly slipping away from them, and taken away from them by a stream of people coming into this country under contract. The contract labourer was a greater thorn and a greater disadvantage to the working man in this country than was the Asiatic to the white trader. The workman in this country should receive as much consideration in this matter as was being given to-day to the question of keeping Asiatics out of the country. It was just as important. Looking at the question strictly from the point of view of the white workers, the Asiatic trader in this country was an advantage to them, because he sold his wares much cheaper.

But the white workmen of this country did not want to advance their own interests at the expense of other sections of the community, but to advance the interests of the country, and so it should be in the case of prohibited undesirable contract labour. They did not want to limit the number of workmen coming into the country; but they objected to men coming here and obtaining situations under contract, securing them from dismissal for a period of three years, say, whilst other people who had lived in the country for twenty or thirty years were dismissed as soon as there was slackness.

said that he agreed that every country should have the right to say who should be excluded and who should have the right to come in. In this Bill they had an education test, which was a very severe one; but, after all, it was a matter of administration, and everything depended upon those on the Treasury benches. They might have a Minister who had one way of looking at the matter and another Minister who had another way of dealing with it. They might have a Minister who was very sympathetic, and who would admit people who were undesirable. He thought it would be much better if they inserted a clause in the Bill stating, once and for all, that they were going to exclude Asiatics. There was no good in heating about the bush. This was the one question upon which Dutch and English agreed. One realised and appreciated the very difficult position in which the Imperial Government were placed, inasmuch as these Asiatics were British subjects; but we in this country were here to work out our own destiny. There was not a single man in this country who would not admit that they made a great mistake when they opened their doors to these people. It would have been a blessing to South Africa, if, when the Free State passed a law prohibiting the introduction of Asiatics, the other Provinces had followed suit. There was no doubt about it that the Asiatics had not been a blessing to South Africa, and they knew that as the result of the importation of these people, hundreds, he might say thousands, of white people who used to do a respectable business had been entirely ousted. The competition of the Asiatic was such that no European could stand up against him, and he would like it to be laid down clearly that in future no Asiatic should be allowed to come into the country. They had made a great mistake in the past, but they must recognise the fact that a number of the Asiatics who had come to this country had acquired certain rights, and, whilst placing restriction upon them, they must allow them facilities to move about in order to carry on their business. These rights must be respected; but they could restrict further immigration. He was entirely opposed to Appeal Boards. The Minister should think more before agreeing to that Board, because I can see that it is possible that the Board may from time to time come into conflict with the Immigration Department. There was a grievance the Indians had because they were not given facilities and a sufficiently long period for visiting India or going on a pilgrimage to Mecca. At the same time, he saw the difficulties there were in the way regarding persons when they returned to South Africa, and the risk of someone entering the country in their place, but safeguards could be adopted. He hoped the Minister would see that these people were not allowed to enter the country overland; over the German or Rhodesian borders. As to consumptives being allowed to enter the country, the hon. member mentioned that at places like Beaufort West, where consumptives congregated, a large number of coloured people had become infected. He hoped Government would accept the recommendations of the Tuberculosis Commission. Finally, they should say now, once and for all, that no longer were Asiatics to be allowed to enter the country. (Cheers.)

congratulated the hon. member for Cape Town, Castle (Mr. M. Alexander) on his very able contribution to the debate. The hon. member had pointed out how the Bill departed from the present law. It was incumbent upon the House to prevent mistakes being made in the future as they had been made in the past. As to the language question, one wondered how many languages the Immigration Officer knew, and there was a risk of the door being closed to immigrants altogether. If the proposals had been in force 50 years ago some of the leading people would never have been in the country. (Hear, hear.) He thought the existing test in the Transvaal was sufficient to exclude everyone they desired to keep out. It had been suggested that things should be made easier for people to come here, and that language and other tests should be made in the country from which the immigrants hailed, so that if they failed to pass the tests, they would not be put to the expense of making a fruitless journey to South Africa. Again, Advisory Boards at Cape Town and Durban would prove most useful. Regarding the Jewish people who came here, he would say that the law had not been over-severely administered. At the same time, some people entitled to come here were, undoubtedly, unjustly kept out, while a very large number had been deterred from coming here through fear of harsh treatment. He thought we ought to throw our doors rather more widely open. During eleven months 300,000 people went to Canada, taking with them 30 millions sterling, while last year South Africa had something under 7,000 immigrants.

Continuing, Mr. Nathan said he thought that the hon. member for Vrededorp (Mr. Geldenhuys) would find that the interjection he made when that subject was previously before the House was very unfortunate. The hon. member for Cape Town, Castle, had referred to a meeting which had been organised to deal with some very important subjects, touching Jews in particular, with regard to immigration, and the hon. member for Vrededorp interjected: “What class of people hold these meetings” That was a very unfortunate remark, and he (Mr. Nathan) believed the hon. member would have cause to think so, too, when he went among his own constituents. (Hear, hear.) If he (Mr. Nathan) were not mistaken, the chairman of the hon. member’s committee belonged to the Jewish persuasion, and a good many of his committee too. The hon. member would find it very difficult to deal with them. However, he gave the hon. member an opportunity for expressing regret for ever having made that remark, for if the hon. member did not do so, he (Mr. Nathan) warned him that the time would come when he would have to consider his position very seriously.

As contrasting the attitude of the hon. member with other members, he read a letter signed by the Premier speaking in appreciative terms of the Jewish people, and also quoted from a speech of the Minister in charge of the Bill, and of one not now on the Ministerial bench. There was an extraordinary provision in the Bill which he hoped the hon. Minister would not let pass as it was at present. It dealt with inter-provincial movement, and made it impossible for people to pass from one Province to another without the Immigration Officer so decided. That officer could insist upon dictating a certain number of words, and even hon. members might not be able to pass from one Province to another unless they were very accomplished. Then, too, there was the provision that laid the burden of proof upon the person who was arrested. The British principle that of throwing the burden of proof upon the person who alleged—was a good one. He urged that the onus should be upon the Government of this country. He thought that when they got Union they were going in for advanced legislation, but he thought they were adopting the very opposite. A further extraordinary principle laid down that any person who within the Union wanted to go away, say for three or six months—possibly for purposes of study—the Minister might say that he must specify within what time he would return. There was a clause in the Bill which provided that if he did not return within that time he would be liable to three months’ imprisonment without the option of a fine. He wanted to ask the Minister also to consider whether it was desirable to repeal the whole of the Transvaal Proclamation of 1907, which required that boarding-house and hotel keepers should be compelled to keep a visitors’ book.

said he confessed to a keen sense of disappointment with regard to the provisions of the Bill. He felt that when the people of South Africa came to examine the provisions they would realise that it was not Bill in the interests of the people of South Africa. It had been stated by the hon. Minister it was acceptable to India, but that was an excellent reason for voting against the Bill. The law in the Free State might have been lax, but was the position going to be made any better by admitting a number of Indians every year? Educated Asiatics were to be allowed to go into the Free State; that would not make the position more secure than it was, he could not possibly see how it could. As a matter of fact, the Bill left the Free State open to as much invasion as the Asiatics liked to undertake. The Bill did not afford sufficient protection for the people of South Africa; it did not afford the protection the people had a right to expect from the Legislature, and his constituents looked upon the Bill as a mere makeshift. Matters should remain as at present until they were able to bring in a Bill that was really in the interests of South Africa. When the interests of this country clashed with the interests of another Dominion, he thought that their first duty was to the interests of their own country. Who would say that that Bill was drawn up in the interest of South Africa? It would admit Asiatics into the country and give rise to an extremely difficult and grave position. It might be in the interests of a few people that these Asiatics should be admitted, but that was not the business of the State. That should be the larger and greater interest of the whole of the people of South Africa, and it was not in the interest of South Africa that Asiatics should be admitted. Under that Bill as many Asiatics as liked could come into the country. The Free State had got a sort of favoured Province clause, but that offered no real protection; only a temporary one. They had always found a difficulty in keeping any sort of check upon the Asiatic in Natal. These people were not to enter into trade or hold property, but the Asiatics would easily evade such provisions. They would hold property and enter into trade in spite of the law. Their law in the Free State had stood the test of time. He would put it to the other Free Staters that if they were going to fill the rest of South Africa with Asiatics there was precious little chance of their keeping them out of the Free State. They might keep them out of the Free State for a while, but eventually they would come in in as large numbers as they liked to do.

We were all agreed that in this country the most serious problem we had to face was the colour problem. Now what were they going to do? They were going to complicate this matter and make it much more difficult to solve this question by introducing an element which was bound to be an element of unrest. It was because he knew the immense prejudice amongst the people of this country against colour that he desired to see a prohibitive clause placed in this Bill. They were going to emphasise that feeling if they were going to allow coloured people from elsewhere to come into this country. He believed our policy should be, and certainly the policy of the Free State in the past had been, to absolutely prohibit the importation of any Asiatics or any sort, of colour into our country and, on the other hand, he would strongly favour the importation, as far as possible, of such European peoples as would be useful to this country in order to reduce the present preponderance between the coloured and white races in South Africa. He should certainly be more pleased to see this preponderance reduced from inside, but apparently this could not be done. It would seem to him that the only chance was a liberal importation of suitable immigrants into this country, white people, in order to correct that balance. We should be beaten eventually by the sheer weight or the sheer ability of the coloured people in this country, unless we could correct that by having a great many more white people here than we had at present and by preventing the introduction of any further colour into this country. It was out of fear and not hatred that we were going to do injustice to the black people, if injustice were done to them, and that fear was brought about by the feeling—it certainly was a feeling strongly held in the north—that we were being gradually out numbered by the coloured people.

The introduction of the Asiatic meant the starving out of the white man. They had an effective illustration of that in the experience of Port Elizabeth. We had been called a “nation of overseers.” We were a “nation of overseers,” and we should continue to be until the Asiatic ousted us and took our place. What chance had the poor white in this country? Did anyone want him? Did any labour agent go about the country to recruit his labour? Did any farmer want him? The answer was, “No.” Instead of making this country a country in which the white man had to work for a white man’s wage and only with fair competition, as far as possible, we were going to make the conditions ever so much worse by allowing any number of Asiatics to come into this country and compete with the people who were already here. They would be told that, if they passed a prohibitive clause, that law would be vetoed. If it were, let them pass it again and let them understand in the United Kingdom that that was what they meant to stand by. He recalled the stand that Cape Town formerly made against the dumping of convicts on her shores. They should, he urged, settle this question in the interests of South Africa and not in the interests of India. They were told that this Bill did exclude Asiatics. That exclusion depended upon the caprice of the Immigration Officer. The education test might be used to keep out a highly-educated Indian or admit an illiterate coolie. It seemed to him a miserable sort of subterfuge, and he was surprised that the British Government should be a party to such a subterfuge, and he was disappointed that our own Government in this country had taken any part in such a miserable subterfuge.

It was much better to tell these people straight out that they should not come to this country. In the committee stages he hoped to move certain clauses into the Act with the idea of making the whole Bill prohibitive. If it were shown that they made this effective in the Free State, then there was no reason why it should not be made effective in the Union. Proceeding, the hon. member said in clause 5 (a), it was stated that officers of His Majesty’s forces were not to be considered as prohibited immigrants. It might be quite possible that a number of natives in India came under this category and they would be allowed to come in if they so desired. Again, in another of the clauses, officers of a foreign ship were allowed to come in, but an officer might be only a supernumerary, drawing merely a nominal wage as a member of the crew, and under the clause he would be able to come in. He thought that there was sufficient evidence to show that any number of Asiatics might come in. The competition of these people in Natal was making it more and more heavy for people to trade in this country. What they had to do was to keep out all Asiatics whether they were educated or uneducated. If it were at all reasonable, he would like to suggest that some reasonable scheme of compensation should be devised to remove all the Asiatics from the country. If these Asiatics were removed it would make the conditions of life easier for the white people that were in it and make it more easy to settle the difficult native question. If the question lay between offending the people of India, or of offending and handicapping their own people, then their duty was to their own people.

said he wanted to approach this subject from a different standpoint. He desired to call the attention of the House to the fact that the circumstances which afflicted the United States, Canada, and Australia, years ago, were the same as South Africa had to face at the present time. In the main the Bill before the House followed the lines laid down by these three countries. Very little need be said about the Asiatics. That was not the most important question. This education test would not keep them out. In Natal they passed two Bills dealing with Asiatics; but the Imperial Government threw out these Bills. Then the people of Natal took the matter into their own hands and appointed an examining officer, with the result that Natal to-day was gradually getting rid of these Asiatic traders.

No, no.

continuing, said the hon. member said “No, no,” but he (Mr. Haggar) knew what he was talking about. The Prime Minister, in a speech in London before the Eighty Club, had asked the British people to send out the very best men, but he would ask where they could find the best emigrants. New Zealand and Australia could not get the very best immigrants. To-day New Zealand was sending agents to Europe to get young lads to come out to the Dominion, where they could be put on farms. This emigration was a serious question in England, and was a great drain on her population. It might not be very long before she would be compelled to put a stop to it. The hon. member referred to a gentleman who had been preparing to import 5,000 men from Sardinia and Calabria; these were to be hired out at 5s. per day, but paid only 1s. 6d., and to pocket this difference. This gentleman told him that South Africans need not fear that these people would enter into competition with those already here.

Last year, proceeded Mr. Haggar, 94,000 people went to Australia, and not 5 per cent. of them were going to take up land. A large number of them were factory hands and agricultural labourers; both classes were objected to by the House; and some of them he had spoken to in Cape Town were diminutive, and below par in health, and many of them deformed. The great trouble in Canada was that it could not get the class it wanted. Why this general demand for immigrants here in South Africa? At Johannesburg a few years ago they had been told that they did not want a white population; white people would want to acquire political power. Lord Milner protested against a white proletariat. Had conditions changed? It was not an economic demand, but a political demand, and, to a very large extent, a just demand. The only country from which we could get immigrants in Large bodies was Southern Italy, and these had been condemned by Lombroso. Far better to bring people here from Northern Europe. Some hon. members might be passionately fond of immigration, although our own people hero were starving. We should be very careful as to the countries from which immigrants came. We need not fear the Asiatics, but if we feared any of them, we should fear the Japanese, and South Africa was too far away from Japan for the Japs to come here in any numbers. As to Asiatics, we should do what was done in Natal, and then we should have our protection in our own hands. With regard to an education test, the U.S.A. had found it essential as a means of self-protection. Australia had an education test, but it was never applied to Europeans. There were some points in the Bill which were distinct steps in advance, and he believed it could be made one which would secure the approbation of the Imperial Power. (Hear, hear.)

referred the House to the evidence given before the Tuberculosis Commission, and drew attention to the report of the Commission, which had made inquiries on the subject of tuberculosis under Sir Almroth Wright. That report clearly showed that tuberculosis was highly infectious. He quoted at length from the Commission’s report, and held it was their duty to see that no people suffering from the disease in an aggravated degree should be allowed to land here. The country should be protected against tuberculosis, and if these steps had been taken twenty years ago, it would have been far better for the country. Since the law of 20th February, 1907, consumptives had been refused admission to the United States of America. They should take that to heart. In the committee stage, he would propose an amendment to the effect that the inhabitants of this country should at least be safe from infection from further arrivals from oversea.

said the hon. member for Lady-brand would be surprised to hear that he agreed with a great deal of what he said. He certainly agreed that they should not further complicate matters in South Africa by the introduction of coloured people from another part of the world. The better course would be to pass a law absolutely prohibiting the further introduction of Asiatics into the country in a straightforward way, and not adopt the hypocritical methods suggested in the Bill. But they should make provision for the admittance of those Asiatics into South Africa who were necessary for the wants of the Asiatics already in the country. The hon. member for Ladybrand seemed to forget that they owed a duty to those already in the country. People who had been allowed to come and settle in the country had certain rights, especially when they happened to be British subjects. The question raised with regard to native as opposed to European labour was off the track; the Bill was to prohibit undesirable immigrants. He had listened with much pleasure to the speech which the hon. member for Cape Town, Castle (Mr. M. Alexander), made the other day, and he agreed almost entirely with the view expressed, but there were certain aspects of the question he would like to bring to the notice of the House.

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 adjourn the debate.

The debate was accordingly adjourned until Monday.

Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure, South African Railways and Harbours Fund, year ending 31st March, 1913.

put upon the table papers relating to the Supplementary Estimates of Railways and Harbours.

said he noticed an item, “inspectors of lands,” but he did not quite know what this referred to. Most of the Governments in South Africa made efforts to get the poor whites settled on the land, and three of the Provinces at any rate made efforts in that direction. In the Transvaal and Orange Free State there did not seem to be any want of money. Money seemed to have been poured out upon these settlements. The Potchefstroom settlement was started when the Transvaal was a Crown Colony Government after the war, and it was subsidised when the Transvaal received Responsible Government. Altogether the Transvaal spent about £100,000 upon that one settlement alone. To-day they had 95 families only upon that settlement. Then with regard to the De Laager Drift settlement, that was settled by the Dutch Reformed Church in 1897, the first amount advanced was £800 by the Government, but something like £17,000 had been advanced to the Church at 4 per cent. Today not one penny of that interest Had been paid. On that settlement to-day there were just 55 families. Altogether £25,600, including interest, had been spent, and the whole result was 55 families settled. These evidently wanted an inspector to look after them; in fact, the whole of the settlements had been unsuccessful. He could not remember one in the Transvaal that had been successful.

Delmas.

continuing, said that Delmas had only been recently started. Let them now take the case of Kakamas, in the Cape Colony. That was also started by the Dutch Reformed Church. They raised £2,500, and they also got a similar amount from the Government. The Government gave them two farms on the banks of the Orange River, which, at that time, were supposed to be worth nothing at all. There they had carried on extensive irrigation works. They made two furrows, one on the north bank of the river and one on the south bank. “And what was the result to-day?” continued the hon. member. “The result to-day was that they had 380 families settled, and each family had six morgen of irrigable land. So that they had 2,280 morgen under cultivation, and when they got the new furrow they would have 480 families settled there.” Continuing, the hon. member said that the total cost was between £72,000 and £73,000, and never one instalment of the interest was overdue. There must be some difference in these results. In De Laager’s settlement, which was also managed by the Church Commissioners, there must be some reason why they were successful in the one case and not successful in the other. In both cases there were different financial terms. In the case of Kakamas, they had to rely upon themselves. The ministers knew that if they lost their money they could not come along and get another advance. They had to make the best of their resources, and the result was that all the men there had to work, and all the furrows and irrigation were done by white labour. In the Transvaal they had relied too much upon the Government, because they knew that all that they had to do was to come to the Government and get an advance. He believed that the House wanted to help the poor whites. They did not begrudge the money to give them a start, but they ought not to be helped by the aid of doles. It was hard work, discipline, and good management, and no interference by the State that made Kakamas a success. There had been too much State help, with the consequence that the people had been robbed of their self-reliance. He hoped the Minister of Lands would alter the state of affairs, and deal with people on business lines. That would be the only way of making land settlements a success.

said that although he did not wish to blame anyone, the Crown Colony Government in the Transvaal had in the past given out certain land for settlement which was absolutely unsuitable for that purpose. There was, for instance, the White River Settlement. The ground was of such a poor quality that no farmer would have ever dreamt of settling there. He agreed that the settlement at Kakamas was one to be proud of, but this was due to the supervision exercised by the Church. The settlements at Delmas and Vlakfontein would, he believed, also be a success. The Potchefstroom Settlement had failed because large sums had been advanced to one particular person, who had turned the whole matter into a speculation. Strict supervision over settlers was essential, but another essential point was suitable ground. He thought, however, that the present Minister of Lands could not be blamed for what had occurred in the past. He was sure that in future the advisers of the Government would see that proper ground was selected. Supervision should not be slackened, but it was not fair to blame the Minister for failures of the past.

said he regretted that this matter had been taken up as if it had been an attack on someone. The hon. member for Cape Town, Central, had spoken with some warmth, and so would the member for Rustenburg if he had been on the Committee of Public Accounts, and learnt what the amount of money was that was spent to very little purpose. That state of affairs had existed before the present Ministry came into office. What was felt was that there was no collective account of these sort of schemes kept. They had to collect information from all kinds of sources, and there was nothing to guide them in the way of finding out where mistakes had been made in the past. Consequently they started afresh each year, spending money in all directions, and thinking they were going to benefit the country. With regard to the reckless expenditure of money, he did not think one Province was worse than another. It was not the fault of any particular Minister. Ho himself had been responsible for some of the schemes that might be mentioned. The fault was that inquiries were never held as to why these things did not succeed. The Provinces that were the richest spent a lot of money, while those that were poor only spent a little because they hadn’t any more. Australia had done just the same thing, and what was felt was, how were they going to avoid it in the future. If they were business men, or dealing with their own money, they would prevent it. They would, before embarking in schemes, sit down and find what had been done and spent in the past, and profit by the failures which had marked the past legislation of this and other countries. They had an interesting report from their engineer with regard to Kakamas, from which they would see how to do it. If they read the meagre accounts in the Auditor-General’s report they would see how not to do it. He did not blame the member for Cape Town because he drew attention to these matters, because he was a business man, and they were embarking in big schemes. He would ask the hon. Minister before going into the market with a brass band to buy big blocks of land, whether he would not turn his attention to the Municipalities. Some of the municipalities had land that was lying vacant. Might he give as an example the Municipality of Worcester? Worcester was one of the most fertile and most improvable districts in the whole of South Africa. There was no large native population, and they had a fertile soil and plenty of water. Just outside the district of Worcester there was a tract of ground that was a disgrace to South Africa, a most fertile tract that had been defertilised by the way in which it had been used. Why could not his hon. friend turn his attention to that? When tracts of ground like that, fertile and near a market, were left without anything being done to make them fertile, it did seem to him that to incur expenditure on a wilderness where there was no market near, was a waste of money. The speaker gave other examples, and asked if Kopjes Kraal would be a success?

That will be a success.

Well, make it a success, and that will give us encouragement.

supported the contention of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, but said that these land settlements were not land settlements in the ordinary sense of the word. They were settlements carried out under extraordinary conditions. The Government of the country had thousands of men thrown upon their hands who did not know where to get the next meal. After the war these men were destitute, and the Government had to do something for them, and these settlements were created to enable them to make a living. Something had to be done at once, without mature consideration, to allow these people to live. That was very difficult, and it was not fair to apply the ordinary test that would be applied to settlements carried out with mature consideration, to a condition of things of that sort. The Government had thousands of these people to provide for; people who did not know how to make a living other than upon the land. Although he agreed with a great deal that his hon. friend had said there had not been that close attention there might have been. He did not lose heart with regard to the land settlements of South Africa, although they had not given the best results.

pointed out that last session the Minister said there was to be a Commission appointed to go into the question of the reduction of quitrents, and he understood that a magistrate had been appointed and was taking evidence. He thought it would have been wiser to have appointed one or two practical farmers to work with the magistrate on the Commission. Such a course would have given rise to more confidence. Was it too late to appoint one or two practical farmers? The question of quitrents was a very important one indeed, and it was just as well to have a Commission that would enjoy the confidence of the whole country. It was a question that would have to be settled. There was a great disparity existing between the Cape Province and other places, and it was time that Parliament approached the matter once for all. If they were not going to have any reduction it should be stated, and they should let the people know it. There was just another matter to which he would like to draw attention. A licencee in the district of Kuruman had unwittingly been done an injustice. He was granted a licence some years ago, and, as he was entitled to do, always had a substitute on the farm. He had made several improvements, and tried to find water, but unsuccessfully, and then the Minister of Lands cancelled his licence. Be (Mr. Wessels) would like the hon. Minister to go carefully into the matter again, for the case was one that ought to be reconsidered. The man had spent £200 or so on the place, and he hoped the injustice would be remedied.

asked if the Minister would give consideration to the establishment of native townships on the Witwatersrand? He thought the establishment of these townships was very undesirable, and he asked the Minister if something could not be done to put a stop to the further establishment of such townships?

referred to the head “Maintenance of Crown Lands,” £1,300—eradication of noxious weeds. He held that absolutely nothing was being done for this £1,300. Unless something were done for the eradication of xanthium spinosum the whole of the sheep industry would be ruined. At present this noxious weed was growing freely on the borders of Swaziland and in the Piet Retief district. If that weed increased the whole wool industry would be ruined, and if £1,300 were not enough to eradicate the weed more money should be spent, but he held that at present nothing was being done. As regarded the White River settlement, he reminded the hon. member for Cape Town, Central (Mr. Jagger), that neither the present nor the former Government was responsible for that settlement. The Transvaal had had to pay something like £44,000 for that settlement, on which there were 16 settlers at one time. Of these 16 settlers 15 had left, the one who was still there keeping a little native shop. The ground, he emphasised, was worth not more than 10s. per morgen. All the homesteads were there, but the orchards were overgrown with grass, and if a fire broke out the whole place would burn down. Profitable offers had been made to the Government, and he urged that it was the Government’s duty to accept some offer ere it was too late.

referred to the Laager Drift settlement, on which the poorest of the poor had been settled and assisted by the Church. These people had suffered exceedingly through droughts, red water, and hail. Matters were, however, progressing now, and these settlers would soon be able to pay up any arrears. As regarded xanthium spinosum, he controverted the statement of the member for Ermelo, and said that in his district the Government had taken the necessary steps for the eradication of this weed.

said he had heard the statement made by the hon. member for Ermelo regarding the settlement, and unfortunately he was not here now. Of course it was a misfortune that the Transvaal Government had not the benefit of his advice, and he hoped that now a hopeful state of things prevailed in this country it would not be wanted. The question raised by the hon. member for Cape Town did not refer to a settlement like White River. That was started with the idea of paying its way; what one might call a business proposition. It was not a business proposition; it was an entire failure. He was very glad to hear that the hon. member for Ermelo, or some other people he knew, were now prepared to take up that land. He would like to point out in regard to this question of poor whites as settlers, it was too much to hope that these settlements could be undertaken on lines that would pay. If they succeeded in paying interest on the money expended by the Government it would mean that they had managed extraordinarily well. They had an instance in this Province, Kakamas, but they had to remember to make a success such as that they must have exceptional management. He hoped the Government would exercise exceptional supervision over these settlements that were not paying. He would only ask the House not to expect too much from the Minister, because if these men could be helped on ordinary business lines, then there would be no need for the Government to interfere. He was as much against wasteful expenditure on these settlements as anybody, but there were times when the Government had to do something. There was the case of Potchefstroom. After the war the Government had hundreds of families on their hands starving, and they had to provide for them He was not going to say that everything was done with the best of advice and with the best success, but those times might come again and they must deal with them in an exceptional way. But let them do so with strict supervision and not throw money away by misexpenditure. Do not let them expect that they were going to make a garden out of a wilderness in two years or three years. He wanted to put a question to the Minister with regard to the Mooibank settlement. It was not a poor white settlement, but a scheme under which a number of settlers were put on the land, on which there was expected to be a certain amount of water available, and certain plots were put aside for them. The water had not been available. The Government of the past had advanced money to these settlers, and those settlers were not only expected to pay back the value of the land, but also the value of the improvements that were done by the State on the land. It was perfectly clear that they could not do so. The Government had two alternatives, either to turn them off or to reconstruct the settlement in such a way that the settlers would be able to live there. The latter course would mean that all the settlers could not remain there, because there was not room for them all; but the Government could pick out a certain number, who would be able to make a living out of the land. He did not say that they would be able to pay back all the money which they owed to the Government, but he would like to appeal to the Government to give those men who were on the land the first chances of getting holdings under the new scheme of allotments. The Government could turn the whole lot off and put new men on, but he would ask that the men on the land should have the first chance.

said he would advise the Minister not to be frightened by the speeches of failure, because he saw a great deal of good being done in putting the men on to the land. It seemed to him that there were great possibilities in the direction of the conservation of water. The farmers of a district might live in a district for years and know nothing of the capabilities of that district.

moved the reduction of the salary of the Minister of Lands by £1, for the purpose of referring more particularly to the administration of the Lands Department with regard to the allocation of work on this Province. He saw by the report of the Public Service Commission that until very lately the Lands Department and the Technical Department of the Surveyor-General in the Transvaal were running together, but later these departments were separated. In the Cape Province the technical and the administrative portions of the Surveyor-General’s office were run by the same office of the Surveyor-General. Continuing, the hon. member was understood to say, in consequence of the re-arrangement documents referring to Crown lands and land matters generally had all been shifted up to Pretoria, and one of the officers of the Department had also been sent from Cape Town to Pretoria, and that therefore all land matters were dealt with there. He wished to say that their land matters—technical and administrative—in this Province were so involved that he thought that that arrangement was most unsatisfactory. If a man wanted information regarding some land, and applied at Cape Town now he was referred to Pretoria, One of the things they had to remember was that in this Province they had by far the largest area of Crown lands in South Africa, and they had plans dealing with those lands and correspondence dating back many years, and as he had said, the technical and administrative portions of land matters were so mixed up that these documents were part and parcel of the matter. Only the other day he wanted to know something about the size of some Crown lands, and was told that he would have to apply to Pretoria. Some of the matters dealing with the Cape Province dated back 250 years, and all those documents had gone to Pretoria. This was a state of affairs which did not meet with the approval of men who had to work with land matters every day.

Another point he wished to refer to in the report of the Public Service Commission was that following the lines of the Transvaal it had entirely dissociated the Surveyor-General from any administrative affairs with regard to lands. Now those of them who were mixed up and consequently working with land matters knew that there were so many things mixed up with the technical and administrative portions that it was difficult to deal with one without the other. They had found that they could not have the technical officer subordinated to the administrative officer. He knew there was a great deal of dissatisfaction because the technical as well as the administrative work was not in the hands of one man. Referring to this matter, he wished to refer again to a question which he had put to the House some time ago, and that was the retirement of the gentleman who was first professional assistant to the Surveyor-General in the Cape. In him they had lost a most valuable officer. The Minister said he was offered the position of Surveyor-General of the Free State, but would not accept it. That was not the question. The question was that the man who had been lost to this Province was a very useful man. He hoped something would be done so that they could retain his services. He saw in the report it was recommended that the Surveyor-General and Deeds Officers be merged and that there were two redundant surveyors, but they were not from the Surveyor-General’s office but the Deeds Office. By some curious means the gentleman from the Surveyor-General’s office was retired, and he was one of the most valuable men they had. He hoped the Minister would look into the matter and see how unworkable and impracticable all this concentration was.

said that there were a few items in that report which required elucidation. He found a sum of £4,092, salaries of redundant officers pending retirement, and temporary assistance. These two terms seemed somewhat contradictory. Lower down he found a new item of £300 for a location inspector, and perhaps, the right hon. Minister might be able to tell them, if one of these redundant officers might not be put in the place of that inspector. Lower down he found an increase of £1,400 for local allowances, and, lastly, item F., an increase of £4,460 for rent and land, over and above 1911.

said that he wished to express regret that the right hon. Minister of Lands had not seen his way to do anything with regard to the settlement of agriculturists on the farm Olifantshoek, in the George district. The farm had been reported on very favourably, but Union followed, and nothing had been done by the Cape Government. The position of the people on Rondevlei was a very serious one, and there were no fewer than 80 families on 150 morgen of arable land, with 230 children. The Minister of Lands had sent his own inspector to report on that farm, and he had reported most favourably, and that they could be put on Olifantshoek, but unfortunately the Forest Department had got hold of that ground and proclaimed it demarcated forest—there were no people who had such land hunger as the Forest Department—(hear, hear)—and when they saw a good piece of ground they said that it was most favourable for a plantation.

said that the question had been asked him what the Government’s intention was with regard to the farms at Rooidam, Prieska. The works there cost the Government £60,000.

Is that not in connection with irrigation?

No; it is a matter of lands. The municipality had made an offer on certain conditions, and he wanted to know whether these would be accepted by the Government and the work completed. There were people who would gladly take on that work, but for some reason or other it was not gone on with. It would only cost a couple of thousand pounds.

said that in the Glen Grey district there were 44 traders, 23 of whom had grounds of five morgen or more, 21 under five morgen, 7 had only two morgen, and 12 had only one morgen. These places formerly paid a very high quitrent of £5 up to £10, and in 1909 an Act had been passed by the Cape Parliament reducing the quitrent to 4s. a morgen, with a minimum of 20s.

Will the hon. member bring it up on Native Affairs?

Yes; I can do so; but it has also to do with lands. He went on to ask whether two or three additional morgen of ground could not be given to these traders, who in some cases had cultivated every bit of their ground, and set an example to others in the way of agriculture.

said that in regard to item C, £14,000, for the purchase of land, no details were given there. He did not know whether that department bought lands in all cases, and he wanted to know whether that was a new arrangement. Item E, maintenance of Crown lands, £15,000, was an entirely new item.

in reply, said that in the first place the hon. member for Cape Town had said that his remarks were not an attack on him (Mr. Fischer) or his Department, and therefore he could return the compliment and say that he did not take it as such. He would like to say that he would rather not go into ancient history, and he agreed with the hon. member for Fordsburg that there were special circumstances in the country at that time, and the number of failures had been somewhat larger than one would have expected in more normal circumstances. It was an inheritance he had got, and he was acting on strict business principles, but he thought his hon. friends opposite would tell them that one assisted a man a little, so that he might have an opportunity of improving his position. Proceeding, he said that they must divide that matter into two classes. To a large extent, he agreed with the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, and the right hon. member for Victoria West that one must deal with these cases on business principles, but to a certain extent there was truth in what the hon. member for Fordsburg had said, that there was a certain community that one could not strictly hold to business principles.

The settlers should be given easy terms, but they should clearly understand that they would have to pay back every penny of the money advanced. There was another class that which had already been on the land, and it was worth while to see whether they could not be re-established on land. The whole question of land settlement in both these cases was to some extent an experiment, and they could not expect to carry on a huge concern like that without loss. At the same time it should be conducted on business lines. He admitted, however, that in the past a great deal more money had been spent than had been necessary, and in some cases there had been an absence of business principles. All the praise given to Kakamas had been fully deserved. He spoke of Koppies with a great amount of hope, and trusted that the result would be to encourage Parliament to do more in that direction. If the information with regard to Worcester commonage had been conveyed to him privately, and not been “brass banded”—(laughter)—he might have had a chance of doing something in connection with it. As to the hardy annual of the hon. member for Bechuanaland (Mr. Wessels), he wanted to deal with that question on business principles, but it was more a matter for the Minister of Finance.

He has resigned, so it’s all right (Laughter.)

said there were undoubted anomalies in the matter of quitrent, but at the same tune they could not have one rule applicable to all. He hoped that the men who steadily for 20 years or more had paid an enormous amount in quitrent, would get some relief. But do not let the hon. member for Bechuanaland tell his constituents that Government was going to run this matter as a philanthropic society. They had twice had remissions, but that was no reason why further remissions should not be made, if justice demanded it. He agreed with the hon. member for Fordsburg to a great extent. With regard to the question of the settlement at Potchefstroom, that question had engaged the attention of the Crown Colony Government. To a great extent they had to deal with men who did not fulfil requirements as settlers. Very large remissions had to be made to them from time to time. They fully recognised this fact that they could not do a satisfactory amount of work with the supply of water available. When this was discovered new arrangements were made by the Government. They found that some not being fully pledged farmers, had asked for help. They asked for certain concessions, and the late Minister of Lands in the Transvaal agreed to certain concessions which they put before him. It was found afterwards that all of them did not agree to these concessions. It was thought a hardship that the willing ones should be handicapped in that way, so they allowed the unwilling ones to get the things they wanted, but they refused that also. The whole matter was one that would claim his attention. Then with regard to the Department of the Surveyor-General. It was found absolutely necessary to separate the technical branch from the practical, and with regard to the removal of certain papers connected with land to Pretoria, that was necessary for official convenience in the Administrative capital. Dealing with the question of the eradication of xanthium spinosum, the Minister said the Government were doing their utmost in the matter, and he hoped to increase the amount on the vote next year. With regard to the hon. member who raised the question relating to Rooidam, the Minister said he had replied fully to that matter in the Senate a few days ago, and he trusted the hon. member would look up what was then said, and so save the time of the House. Answering the hon. member for Tembuland, he regretted to say that no promise of a reduction could be given. Regarding the sub-vote of £4,092 queried by the hon. member for Von Brandis, that was provision made for the officers of the Free State Land Settlement Board, which, by fluctuation of time, reverted to the Union. This was an allowance which was only of a temporary nature. With regard to the amount for surveying, this was in connection with beacons. There was so much of this work to be done that complaints were made that the Government did not utilise the services of another surveyor. It was the duty of the Government to have the beacons set right, as a great deal of trespassing was taking place. Replying to the member for Port Elizabeth, the Minister said the item of £1,400 was provision for the purchase of land for asylums, museums, and defence. That of £6,000 requisitioned by the Department of Justice was for Magistrates’ Courts and Offices in the four Provinces, and sub-vote of £4,000—Department of Forests—was for the purchase of extra forest lands.

said the hon. Minister’s reply had been most unsatisfactory. He (Mr. Wessels) asked a certain question, and the Minister had told them a lot of things, but he had not answered his question. He wanted to know if it was not possible that one or two farmers could not assist the magistrate who was making inquiry into the question of quitrents. The Minister had charged him with bringing up a hardy annual, but he was dealing with a part of the country of which the Minister had no conception. He was placing it in the same category as the Free State. He had asked the Minister to go and have a look at the country, but he was not going to do it. He (Mr. Wessels) did not come to sit in the House of Assembly for pleasure; he had constituents who were largely interested in this question of quitrents. (Laughter.) He was not going to be brow-beaten by anybody. “He will hear my voice until he deals with this matter in a proper, business-like manner.”

But I—

The hon. member’s remarks were personal; he must not say “he” and “him.”

This question of quitrents is a burning one, and I want the Minister to approach it in a businesslike way. The capital could be redeemed by paying 20 times the amount of the quitrent; but the individual must pay the full amount down. If he would instruct the gentleman who is making the inquiry to consider whether the amount payable could not be paid in instalments, say, a third or a quarter, as the case might be, he would then in some respects meet these people, because in most cases farmers are not in a position to plank down the whole amount at once. He wanted to refer the hon. Minister to a number of farms in Bechuanaland that were not purchased from the Government, but were based upon titles given by Kafir chiefs. These people were entitled to the properties, and quitrents had been put upon them that they were not entitled to have put upon them. They had not the money to take their eases to the Privy Council, and had to submit to the imposition. These cases required the serious consideration of the Government. The gentleman conducting the inquiry was sent up into that part of the country, but his instructions were so meagre that he could not go into the question at all. It was a grievance that went on from year to year, and he would bring up this question of quitrents until the grievances were redressed.

asked the hon. Minister how many settlers had been placed upon the Dinizulu farm now? Last year he made the same inquiry, but at that time the hon. Minister was not in a position to answer.

said the farm had been leased to two men.

asked whether the farm was of such a nature as the hon. Minister would have purchased for land settlement?

It would depend upon what class of men were settled on it. Answering a further question by the hon. member for Pretoria East, the Minister said it would probably do for goat farming.

called attention to the want of coordination in regard to the Meteorological Department, responsibility being divided. There was only one first order station, which was at Johannesburg, which was under the control of the Government. There was one at Kimberley, and there was one at Observatory, controlled by the Admiralty. How was the Minister going to deal with these matters when they were not under one department?

The Director of Irrigation dealt with this in his last report—the value to be derived from an organised weather department. He said that in his previous report, when Director of Irrigation of the Cape Province, he commented very strongly on the inefficiency of the Cape meteorological service as administered by the Meteorological Commission. Proceeding, the hon. member said it seemed to him that the whole matter should be under one Minister, because the question of wind velocity, on which in other countries a great deal of weather forecasting was based, was mainly done at the Observatory; and he thought that wind gauges and so on might well be controlled by an officer of the department. They should be co-ordinated under one officer. If these works were to be carried out by two separate officers, he did not see how the country was going to get value for its money. So he would like the Minister to explain how he intended to deal with this. Canada spent £25.000 per annum on this subject. The present Union vote was £2,825. During a year in Canada, 1,555 warnings of weather forecasting storms and so on were issued to the ports, and 89.8 per cent. were verified as correct. Those forecasts were of great value to shipping and farmers. Every farmer would realise that if farmers were accurately informed of coming storms they would be able to save a vast amount of stock and produce. He would like some hon. members to go to America to see what was being done there in the direction of meteorology.

said he would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the grant to the South African Irrigation Association of £400. He objected very much to that grant. He expected that the members of this association were well-to-do farmers, and they should be able to subscribe without the Government s assistance. He moved the deletion of the item.

said that the hon. member for Newlands was a little premature with his remarks. This matter was in its infancy, and was neglected in the Cape Province. These observations he spoke about were already being issued, and he hoped this would be extended year by year. That money on vote F was proposed to be spent at Grootfontein for the development of irrigation. With regard to the grant to the Irrigation Association, he thought it was money well spent, for good work was done.

Is it paid on the £ for £ principle?

No; I don’t think it would pay on that principle. I was satisfied that the work was good and needed encouragement. I think the vote is justified.

referred to the vote of £3,600 for the purpose of preparation and supervision of irrigation and water supply projects for farmers, municipalities, and other public bodies. He was told once that the farmers paid for that.

said that a fair amount of this would come back, and he thought the amount very small.

was proceeding to deal with erosion, when

said that that point could be dealt with under another vote.

moved to report progress, pointing out that there were other people who were to be considered besides the members, and who were not able to come to the floor of that House and state their case.

Wasting time.

I am speaking on behalf of the gentlemen who have to take notes of the speeches made in this House and have to transcribe them so as to appear in Hansard to-morrow morning. Their work is very trying, and they have to be ready to start again to-morrow morning I am sorry to see that I am meeting with opposition. Well, if I can’t get the support of the Minister there is no use my going on.

was understood to ask the Minister whether better arrangements could not be made for the care of valuable documents in the Deeds Office.

said that he fully agreed with what the hon. member had said, and he would do his best to get the attention of the Public Works Department devoted to the subject. (Hear, hear.)

said that in the Transkei there were two sets of surveyors, those of the General Council of the Transkei and those employed by the Government. The General Council had asked the Government to agree to there being only the Government set, and allow the Council to contribute to their pay. He hoped the Minister would take survey of that and take that into consideration.

suggested that progress be reported.

moved accordingly.

declared that the “Ayes” had it.

called for a division, but subsequently withdrew.

Progress was reported and leave obtained to sit again to-morrow.