House of Assembly: Vol14 - FRIDAY JANUARY 31 1913
from D. Plekker, teacher, for condonation of break in his service.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions. Grants and Gratuities.
from inhabitants of Harrismith, for introduction of legislation whereby it will be made illegal for Europeans to farm in so-called company with natives or to let ground to natives (13 petitions).
from W. H. Whitney, gaoler, for condonation of break in his service.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.
from Hannah Nicholson, teacher, for condonation of certain breaks in her service.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.
from A. S. Hancock, gaoler, praying that the House may grant him a pension.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.
from It. S. Bezuidenhout, who has been granted the title of Doctor of Mechano-Therapy by the American College of Science, Chicago, praying that the House may grant him certain privileges in respect of the said title.
from J. Williams, formerly a blacksmith Cape Railway Department, for increase of pension.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions. Grants and Gratuities.
from residents in Kuruman, Bechuanaland, for construction of a railway from Vryburg or Wursing Siding to Kuruman, and for completion of the extension from Wursing Siding or Vryburg to De Larey.
from the widow of C. A. James, late sergeant Cape Mounted Police, for relief.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.
from registered voters in Elliot, praying that the district be annexed to the Cape Province-(Two petitions.)
from Augusta F. van der Lith, assistant teacher, for condonation of a break in her service.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.
from A. L. Roos, in railway service of the Cape, for condonation of a break in his service.
The petition was referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.
Report upon the returns for the year 1910, submitted by the life assurance companies (Cape).
Estimate of expenditure, year ending March 31, 1914 (excluding railways and harbours administration).
The Bill was read a first time, and set, down for second reading on Wednesday.
*The MINISTER OF DEFENCE, in moving the second reading of the Arms and Ammunition Bill, said that it had a double object—the co-ordinating of the present laws in relation to the possession and importation of arms and ammunition and also the remedying of certain defects in those laws. The present was a good opportunity for dealing with this important question. Under the Defence Act—to which an overwhelming response had been given by the country— (loud cheers)—the distribution of rifles would be on a large scale, and firearms would become much more common in South Africa in the future than they had been in the past. It was, therefore, necessary to deal with the question of the possession of firearms as early as possible. For a number of years the smuggling of firearms had been very common in certain parts of South Africa. In certain parts and on the borders of some of the Protectorates gun-running had been proceeding which ought to be checked by the most effective means at the country’s disposal. The only way to deal with this was to deal with the whole question. Some of the laws regarding this matter at present in force, notably in the Cape Province, were defective. There were three sets of precautions which it was possible to take if they wished to check the illegitimate use or possession of firearms. In the first place we would have to make provision in regard to the importation of firearms; in the second place in regard to the rights of people to be in possession of firearms, and in the third place in regard to the sale of firearms by dealers. The primary object of the Bill was not to hamper the population, but to deal as specifically as possible with the possession of rifles. Hon. members would see that most of the innovations contained in the Bill referred, not to firearms and ammunition in general, but to rifles and rifle ammunition. The first chapter of the Bill dealt with the importation of arms and ammunition, and it was laid down that in future no rifles or rifle ammunition should be imported in the Union without a permit. In that way we should be able to ascertain the quantity of firearms and ammunition brought into the Union. Then it provided that no exportation should take place to a neighbouring territory without the consent of the authorities of such territory, and provision was made empowering the Government to restrict the dealing in arms in any part of the Union. Circumstances might arise when it might become necessary to prohibit entirely the dealing in arms and ammunition. At present Government had no such power. Then no private son would be allowed to import ammunition for cannon. The chapter which would interest the general public most was the one dealing with the sale and purchase of arms and ammunition. This chapter provided that within six months of the Act coming into force there should be a registration throughout the Union of all rifles, In that way it would be possible for them at the start to know what number of rifles they had to deal with and how they were distributed over various parts of the Union. If disarmament should be necessary at any time in any part of the Union it was important to know exactly how the rifles were distributed over various parts.
As to the future, it would be laid down that no person could obtain a rifle unless he had obtained a permit or a licence from a Magistrate. In the case of coloured persons it was laid down that no rifle could be obtained unless with the sanction of the Minister. No such special provision was made in regard to other firearms in the case of coloured persons. Hon. members would see that a provision like that was entirely reasonable, because there were very few reasons indeed—and then only in very special cases—why coloured persons or natives should be in possession of rifles in the Union. (Hear, hear.) Firearms might be required by coloured people mostly for the protection of their gardens, crops, and flocks. For that purpose it was easy for them to get other firearms, shot-guns, etc., simply on a Magistrate’s permit. Certain classes of persons would not need these licences, and they were specified in the Bill. They included, of course, all persons who were armed or were going to be armed under the provisions of the Defence Act. Then there was also an exception in the case of a person who held a firearm coming under the authority of a licence holder. A master, for instance, might wish to give his servant a firearm to protect his property, and in that case no licence would be necessary, except, of course, by the master. Then certain provisions were made in case a person wanted to dispose of his firearm, and it was laid down that when a person who was a licence holder of a rifle wanted to dispose of it he had to go to the Magistrate, have his licence cancelled, and see that the person to whom he sold it obtained a licence. It would be quite possible under the provisions made in the Bill to regulate fairly, correctly, and absolutely the interchange of rifles between persons within the Union. In regard to ammunition, provision was made that a person who was licensed to hold a rifle might go to any dealer and buy ammunition for it as much as he wanted to use, without any permit or any licence. Thus there was no restriction in the case of ammunition. Once a person held a licence to buy a gun he might follow it up by buying ammunition. The only case in which it was necessary to get a permit from the Magistrate to hold ammunition was in the case of a coloured person. Chapter III. dealt with licensed dealers, and it was laid down specifically that a licensed dealer would get his licence only if he were a fit and proper person, and had certain definite premises, and he could only make over his licence again in case the new premises were approved or the new person were approved. A licensed dealer would have to keep a register of all persons to whom rifles and ammunition were sold. There were a number of smaller miscellaneous provisions in the Bill, but it was not necessary for him (the Minister of Defence) to detain the House very much with them. Hon. members would see that the Resident Magistrate also kept a register of all the permits which he issued from time to time, and the manufacture of ammunition in the Union could not take place by private persons unless under the authority of the Government. He begged to move that the Bill be read a second time.
said that this Bill might well be called a Bill to prevent the coloured people from holding rifles. (Hear, hear.) He held just as firmly as anybody in this House that it was an impossible policy to allow the uncivilised native to become a holder of guns and ammunition, and there was nobody who would be more against the gun-running that had been going on than he was; but, surely, in a country like this, with its mixed population, they might take some trouble to frame the law in such a way as to avoid, should he say, treading on the toes of respectable people, who formed a large portion of the population. (Hear, hear.) The Bill would, as it stood, cause a very great amount of discontent in the country amongst a certain portion of the population, and, although the Act of Union had not allowed them to be directly represented in that House, surely they ought to be considered in regard to any legislation that might be introduced. In this Bill there was no attempt to separate between the civilised and the uncivilised people, no attempt to separate between the native and the coloured men, who were two distinct sections of the population. The purpose was that they should not hold a rifle, and it bad been plainly put before them that it was a necessary completion of the Defence Act that these people were to be prevented even from holding rifles. He thought it was a cruel law, and that more attention ought to have been paid to the view that he was putting before the House. In regard to coloured people who already held rifles, it might almost seem, according to section 6, that they would be allowed to continue holding these guns; but it was provided that any person who held a ticket of registration or a licence prior to the commencement of this Act would be deemed to be the holder of a licence under the section, and he was afraid that a great many of these people had no permits. In effect, this would be a kind of Disarmament Bill. He urged that there was such a vast number of white people in the country, who, under the provisions of clause 36, were not really subject to the provisions of this law, that there was no reason whatever, to his mind, why the remainder of the white people in the country should not all be under the same law as the coloured people, and that there should have been no mention of colour whatsoever. He thought it would have been far better, instead of creating this colour bar in the clause, to say that every permit that was issued by a magistrate should be approved by the Minister, whether for black or white. He would ask the Minister whether he could not amend the Bill, and make it so that a large portion of the population would not be compelled to feel that a stigma had been placed upon them. With reference to the clause dealing with the purchase of ammunition, he failed to see why those white people, who were not exempted from the provisions of this Act, should not have been placed on the same basis as the coloured man. While the purchase of ammunition was made easier for white people, under clause 15 no person was allowed to sell ammunition to or for the use of any coloured person without a permit from the magistrate. He was just as opposed as his Dutch friends were to the indiscriminate sale of firearms, and to allowing the uncivilised native to get possession of arms, but let us do it in the proper way. He hoped the Bill would considerably be modified by the Minister when it came into committee.
said the hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. Schreiner) seemed to lose sight of the fact that this House had to legislate not for one small part of South Africa, but for the whole Union, and that conditions were not everywhere like Cape conditions. In the northern parts of the Union the coloured people and natives were distributed over the farms, and it would be fatal if natives were allowed to carry firearms. It was not so much a question of the safety of the whites. The first consequence of such a step would be that all game would be exterminated within a few years. What would happen if all the natives on the mines were armed? Furthermore, in the event of a native rising, the effect would be disastrous. As regarded the Bill itself, he welcomed its general principles, but could not agree to all its provisions. He was glad that dealers’ licences had been made cheaper than those in the Orange Free State. He was opposed to the payment of licences by buyers of rifles, and could not understand why such licences were not provided gratis. Moreover, dealers’ licences also would have to be paid by the public. According to the Defence Act, a large proportion of the public would have to be armed, and it was not necessary for those persons to pay for licences who obtained their rifles from the Government. Why then should the others pay? They should encourage citizens to have their own rifles. Licences would tend to prevent that.
said he regretted that the hon. member for Tembuland always tried to awaken a feeling which did not exist, and for which the Bill gave no occasion. From the speeches which were made by the hon. member, the natives would gain the impression that Parliament was engaged in class legislation. The Bill was necessary. Its provisions were required for the welfare of the country. There were a few provisions with which he could not agree. He could not for example, see why a poor man who had had a rifle in his house for years should have to pay five shillings. (“No, no.”) Well, he was glad to learn that he was mistaken. Within six months after the coming into operation of the Bill, all rifles had to be registered. That was all right, but the owners should be warned, as they were not all acquainted with the law. When the Minister of Finance was recently charged with a breach of the Scab Act, he pleaded before the Court that, he was not acquainted with the regulations under that Act, and so got off without a fine. The speaker could not agree to the provision that any policeman could challenge the owner of a rifle to produce his licence.
said he disagreed with the provision of clause 15, which forbade a shepherd to be in temporary possession of ammunition. In the northern districts of the Transvaal some farmers had more than one cattle post, but they were not allowed to have more than one dog. And yet, the cattle should be protected against beasts of prey. Under certain conditions they were allowed under the Bill to have rifles, but were not allowed to have ammunition. The possession merely of a rifle would not help the shepherds in a case such as that. The speaker quoted instances of losses caused by beasts of prey, and hoped the Minister would try to meet the public in this respect. Otherwise he thought the Bill a good one. According to the Transvaal Act, a farmer was allowed to place his shepherd in temporary possession of a rifle and ammunition, but the present Bill forbade the possession of ammunition by a coloured man.
opposed what had been said by the hon. member for Tembuland concerning a differentiation in legislation between coloured persons and white persons. The hon. member was very wrong in doing that, and must not think that he would in that way win the support of many members of the House. But as the hon. member had run away from the House, the speaker would not say anything more on the subject. He wished to see penal provisions in the Act for the imprudent playing with and handling of firearms. They were continually hearing of accidents which were caused in that way. He was opposed to the payment of licence moneys by those who bought rifles and were required to give their services to the country.
said the last speaker had made a most unworthy attack on the hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. T. L. Schreiner), and had tried to lead the House to think that the latter always endeavoured to force on the House the position that whites and coloured people must be equal. The hon. member for Tembuland did nothing of the sort—(Ministerial cries of dissent)—bui he said that you could not treat natives and savages in exactly the same manner as coloured people, and he (Mr. Struben) entirely agreed with that. He thought that both coloured and natives were extraordinarily loyal. On many occasions coloured people had stood side by side with the whites—both English and Dutch—lighting against the forces of savagery. They could not treat self-respecting, sober coloured people in the same way that they would raw savages. He appealed to the House to look at the matter in a broad-minded way, and try to keep the coloured people the good friends of the whites that they had always been in the past. (Hear, hear.)
was astonished at the remarks of the hon. member for Tembuland, which the speaker thought proved his lack of experience in respect of the conditions prevailing in the northern Provinces, which must be considered as well as the other Provinces. What would be the result if the natives in the north were armed? The provisions contained in the Bill were safe, and the speaker only wished to make a few remarks. He agreed with the hon. member for Waterberg in wishing to see a provision inserted in the Bill allowing a shepherd in the employ of a farmer in the busn-veld, where there was a good deal of vermin, to have ammunition as well as a rifle in his possession. The Minister ought to recognise the old licences given out under Crown Colony Government at 10s. as still valid. Every unprejudiced person would support the Bill.
also deplored the speech which had been made by the hon. member for Tembuland. If they were going to arm the natives, what would be the position of the white people in the Transvaal, where there was only one white to ten natives? The licence charges for rifles were too high for country districts, while the price of ammunition should be made uniform throughout the whole country.
The motion was agreed to.
The Bill was read a second time, and set down for committee stage on Friday next.
*The MINISTER OF LANDS, in moving the second reading of the Carnarvon Outer Commonage Settlement Bill, said that this was an intricate matter, and one that had engaged the attention of the Government for some time. The history of the case showed that more than 80 years ago, when great dangers were anticipated to the farmers in the neighbourhood of Victoria West from Bushmen in more northern parts, a large number of cattle were placed on a farm which was now the site of the village of Carnarvon, as a kind of buffer protection between the white men of Victoria West and the Bushmen. People settled there, and, after a certain period, the Government of the day decided to have the land surveyed and apportioned, so as to arrive at something like a definite title for those who were there. The ground was surveyed, and then the difficulty commenced by their laying out a village, now the village of Carnarvon, and dividing the erf-holders into two batches, one with rights of commonage on a certain restricted area of about 12,000 morgen, and the other with the same rights, but also larger rights outside this area. As the village advanced and the difficulties in regard to grazing rights attached to the various erven increased, confusion arose, and this confusion had existed for a considerable period, but, after inquiry, it had been found that it was capable of being solved. Two Commissions were appointed, one in 1895 and another in 1909, and both recommended certain courses by which to recognise facts as they were, and to grant such titles as would be based on rights that had been exercised for a number of years. The Bill had been framed in that spirit. The Minister added that there was no great principle involved in the Bill, but the matter was one of considerable intricacy in detail, and he proposed, after the second reading had been taken, to move that it be referred to a Select Committee, and it was possible that Parliament would deal with it in the spirit of accepting what the committee might report, in addition to what had gone before.
said he thought the thanks of his constituents were due to the Minister of Lands for the pains he had taken in seeing that this Bill was brought forward. The matter had been hanging over for many years, and there was a tract of ground 180,000 acres in extent involved, which could not now be properly developed because people had not got individual rights. The people who had got rights were few in number, but they could not apply them until they had something settling the exact right of these people on the outside commonage. There were certain little difficulties, and this House would be, as he hoped Parliaments here always would be, very careful about vested interests and vested rights being protected, and that Bills dealing with them should not be dashed through without anybody having an opportunity of having their voice heard. He believed there was a general consensus of opinion, but still he thought that the course proposed by his right hon. friend was a very wise one of having a little Select Committee who would thrash these matters out, arid consider the different amendments, and then he was sure the House would probably accept them, and they would get through. He thanked his right hon. friend for having brought this matter forward, and having mastered what was a most intricate and complicated subject.
heartily welcomed the Bill, and thanked the Minister for introducing it. He had asked for it for years. There were a few minor points which he did not quite agree with, but those could be considered in Select Committee. There were, for instance, “opstallen” in the mountains, and others on the flats; and regulations concerning them would be required.
The motion was agreed to and the Bill was read a second time.
The MINISTER OF LANDS moved that the Bill be sent to a Select Committee for consideration and report, and to consist of seven members.
seconded.
asked whether it would be competent at that stage to speak on the Bill. His hon. friend had desired to say something about it.
The motion was agreed to.
said that he would like an answer to his question.
The hon. member must surely know when a Bill has been read a second time the whole phase of that portion of the Bill is passed, and no further address can be made thereon.
said he would give notice of the names of the members of the committee.
The House adjourned at