from S. Olivier, a teacher in the Steynsburg Public School, praying for the condonation of a break in his service, or for other relief.

from H. A. Davidson, of Woodstock, formerly a trooper in the Cape Urban Police, who, owing to permanent injuries sustained whilst on duty in 1911, has now been discharged, praying for consideration of his circumstances and for relief.

from W. S. Gillard, and nine others, inhabitants of Simon’s Town, praying for legislation providing for the Direct Popular Veto, whereby men and women may decide by ballot on the continuance, reduction, or issue of liquor licences, or for other relief; and a similar petition from G. Riddle, and 18 others, inhabitants of Simon’s Town.

brought up the report of the Select Committee on the petition of the Mayor and Town Council of Vryheid, and moved that the report, together with the evidence, be printed.

The motion was agreed to.

The report was set down for consideration on May 7.

Government Notices Nos. 641 and 642 of 1913, having reference to the appointment of members of Land Boards in terms of the Land Settlement Act, 1912.

Report in compliance with a resolution adopted by the House of Assembly on the 8th April, 1913, viz.: That the petition from G. C. Wakeford and 3,578 others, residents in the districts of Barkly West and Kimberley, praying for the construction of a line of railway from Kimberley to Kuruman, via Barkly West, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 18th March, 1913, be referred to the Government for consideration and report.

moved, as an unopposed motion: That the estimates of expenditure from loan funds to be defrayed during the year ending the 31st March, 1914, presented to this House on the 14th March, and paragraphs (1), (3) and (8) of the second report of the Select Committee on Public Accounts, as printed on pages 251 and 252 of the Votes and Proceedings, be referred to the Committee of Supply.

Agreed to.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) What is the number of railway accidents since Union and the number during a corresponding period before Union; (2) what is the amount of compensation paid during those respective periods; and (3) what is the cost of wreckage during the same periods?

replied: (1) Number of serious train accidents for period of two years and ten months prior to Union, and similar period since Union: Prior to Union, 89; since Union, 79; decrease, 10. (2) Compensation paid during same periods: Prior to Union, £10,622; since Union, £55,296; increase, £44,674. (3) Cost of wreckage or of repairing damage done to stock and permanent way during same periods: Prior to Union, £29,432; since Union, £35,544: increase, £6,112. The increases under (2) and (3) are due to the abnormal expenditure as a result of the Gaika Loop disaster, which occurred on the 5th January, 1911, which accounted for £48,566 of the compensation paid, and for £8,356 of the cost of repairing the permanent way and replacing or repairing damaged stock. The number of accidents since Union in which passenger trains were concerned was 19, compared with 24 for the corresponding period prior to Union.

asked the Minister of Lands: (1) Whether any advances have been made under sections 47 and 48 of Natal Act No. 44 of 1904; and, if so, (2) how much is at present outstanding for principle and interest?

replied: (1) and (2) Advances were made to fourteen settlers at Winterton in terms of sections 47 and 48 of Act No. 44 of 1904 (Natal), but, on conversion of the tenure from leasehold to freehold, the amounts of the unpaid advances, with interest, were included in the purchase Prices of the allotments. Nothing is outstanding, except what may be included in arrear instalments of purchase price.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) Which of the Grievances Commission’s recommendations, (a) personal and (b) general, have already been given effect to; (2) which others the Government intend to put into effect and from what date; and (3) which of the Railway and Harbour Regulations governing servants issued on the 1st January, 1913, have been officially altered, and in what respect have these alterations been made?

replied: (1) (a) Personal.— The first, second, and third reports of the Grievances Commission deal almost entirely with individual grievances. The Commission reported upon 804 grievances, and these have been disposed of as under: 452 recommendations have been adopted; 23 will be adopted as opportunity offers (see 2a); 70 have been adopted in a modified form; 59 have not been adopted; 188 fixed establishment cases, involving an immediate expenditure of £2,500 and an annual recurring expenditure of £600, are under consideration, and a decision will be issued at an early date; 14 other recommendations are also under consideration. (b) General.—General questions are dealt with in the fourth and final report of the Commission, which was published ten days ago. A majority of the recommendations in that report deal with the necessity of introducing uniformity in staff methods and codifying conditions of service. The majority of such recommendations have been anticipated in the Railways and Harbours Service Act of 1912 and in the staff regulations which came into operation on 1st January last. The details of the final report are at present under consideration. (2) (a) Twenty-three, as soon as opportunity offers. (2) (b) Under consideration. An interesting feature which emerges from the Commission’s investigations is the fact that very few of the individual grievances are incidental to the amalgamation of the railways. The bulk of such grievances and a large majority of the general grievances are a legacy from provincial Administrations, and they have been forced into relief pending the introduction of uniform conditions by the varying practice in the different Provinces. This is borne out by the following figures, which show how individual grievances are distributed: Grievances submitted by ex-Natal staff, 179; by ex-C.S.A.R. staff, 147; by ex-Cape staff, 478; total, 804. (3) Fitters and boilermakers employed in transportation running sheds have been granted a dirt allowance of 1s. per day. A special class for guards at a maximum of 11s. 6d. has been introduced. The guarantee which Natal running men who were in the service at the date of Union drew on that date has been specifically safeguarded to them. Any trainman who is booked off at the end of a short run will be paid for such run on the following basis: If he is on duty 4½ hours or less, half a day’s pay; if he is on duty over 4½ hours to 6¾ hours, three-quarters of a day’s pay; if he is on duty over 6¾ hours, one day’s pay. Shunting drivers at Greyville have been allowed 20 minutes for walking to and from station yard. Enginemen who book on and off at Cape Town Station have been allowed 30 minutes for booking off and 30 minutes for booking on, to cover the time taken in walking from the shed to the station. The time allowance for engine duties has been extended for Mallet engines and at certain depots where exceptional conditions operate. The scale of booking off expenses has been improved. The Caboose allowance has been converted into a booking off allowance at a rate satisfactory to the staff concerned. The conditions under which trainmen travel as passengers have been altered to meet the points submitted to the administration by the staff, namely: Full time, if the time absent from home depot does not exceed twelve hours, will be paid; if the time absent exceeds twelve hours, actual time working plus half time travelling, plus a guarantee of earning power equal to one day’s pay within 24 hours after return to depot. Bedding will be allowed free when travelling on trains. Every grade has been specifically assured that the rates which they drew on December 31 last are safeguarded to them. The manner in which the regulations should be interpreted in a number of special cases has been discussed by the staff with the general manager, and such interpretations have been published to the grades concerned.

asked the Minister of Finance: (1) Whether he is aware of representations made by the United Municipal Association of South Africa to the then Minister of Finance on the 27th February, 1912, with regard to the operation of the Stamp Duties and Fees Act, 1911; and (2) whether he proposes to introduce legislation amending that Act so as to exempt municipal stocks issued before the passing of the Act from the duty of 1s. per £100 on transfer?

replied: (1) Yes. (2) When a suitable opportunity occurs I propose to introduce legislation amending the Stamp Duties and Fees Act, 1911, so as to exempt South African municipal stock issued before the passing of the Act from liability for transfer duty.

asked the Minister of Mines whether he has any information as to the report promised by the Board on page 6 of the Blue-book containing the reports on the working of the Miners’ Phthisis Board (U.G. 13—’13), submitting suggestions as to the better working of the Miners’ Phthisis Act, 1912; and whether the Board, or any members of it, are prepared to make any such suggestions; and, if so, whether he will place the papers containing such report or suggestions on the Table of this House?

replied: In reply to a communication addressed to the Board, I am informed that the Miners’ Phthisis Board’s chief difficulty arose on connection with applications from oversea. Suggestions with regard to this have already been submitted, and a draft form of application has been approved, which will satisfactorily deal with this matter. The Board states that the necessity for other suggestions has been obviated. I understand that one member of the Board has some suggestions, but I have not received them. I have no papers to lay on the Table on the matter.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether the Government will, during the present session, introduce legislation to provide for the periodical inspection of weigh-bridges, weights and measures in rural districts, or otherwise provide for such inspection?

replied: I fear very much that an opportunity will not arise during the current session of introducing such legislation as is referred to by the hon. member.

asked the Minister of Finance whether, in fixing the pension due to officials transferred from the Civil Service of the United Kingdom, who retire on superannuation under the provisions of Ordinance No. 30 of 1906 (Transvaal), the provisions of an Act of the Imperial Parliament, entitled The Superannuation Act, 1909 will be regarded as applicable to such officials?

replied: There is an element of doubt as to whether the provisions of the Imperial Act of 1909 are applicable to officials whose pensionable rights are governed by the Transvaal Pensions Ordinance of 1906. Representations on the subject have been made to the Treasury, and the matter is still under consideration.

asked the Minister of the Interior: (1) Whether he is aware that under the existing laws of the Union a person born and bred in South Africa, but who qualified in England or on the Continent as medical practitioner or dentist, is allowed to practise in some of the Provinces of the Union but not in others; and (2) whether he will, during the present session, introduce legislation whereby such persons will be allowed to practise their respective professions in any part of the Union?

replied: The reply to (1) is in the affirmative. The proper manner in which to secure uniformity in the direction indicated by the hon. member would be to make the necessary provision in a Bill for consolidating the Medical and Pharmacy Laws at present in force in the different Provinces; but it will be quite impossible to introduce any measure of that nature into Parliament during the present session.

asked the Minister of Lands: (1) How many applications have been received from individuals, or collection of individuals, such as Irrigation Boards, for assistance of engineers of the Irrigation Department in connection with private irrigation schemes since the inauguration of the Union; (2) how many such applications have been attended to; (3) what has been the cost to Government of attending to these applications including cost of surveys, preparation of plans and specifications, also administrative and accounting expenses; and (4) what amount has been received by Government for services rendered in attending to these applications?

replied: In reply to the first question, 747 applications have been received from bona-fide farmers or Irrigation Boards for professional assistance in terms of section 6 of the Irrigation and Conservation of Waters Act No. 8 of 1912, or the corresponding sections of the Cape and Transvaal Acts now repealed. In reply to the second question there were, on the 31st March, 1913, 139 cases still unattended to. In reply to the third question, it is impossible to give the actual cost in these cases as the work which forms part of the duties of the regular staff is so mixed up with other work connected with irrigation loans, reconnaissance surveys, control of Irrigation Boards, etc., that the labour of analysing the expenditure in the manner suggested by the question would be wholly unjustified. In reply to the fourth question, the amount accruing to Government in fees from the date of Union to 31st March last, in connection with these applications, is £3,404. It may be added that the information asked for is supplied regularly in the annual reports of the Director of Irrigation.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours: (1) What is the position of the railway servants who are on the Cape fixed establishment but do not contribute towards the Pension Fund, with regard to their leave of absence and other privileges, and (2.) are such servants, when retired through abolition of office or retrenched through redundancy of staff, entitled to any gratuity or pension, and if so, upon what basis of calculation?

replied: (1) Cape fixed establishment servants who are not contributors to the Pension Fund are, generally speaking, entitled to the same privileges under the new regulations in regard to leave of absence and the like as any other railway servants. Where, under any pre-Union Act or regulations definite rights were set out or procedure defined in regard to such servants, the Railway and Harbours Service Act and the regulations issued there under provide for the continuance of the old conditions, thus securing the rights of the servants concerned. (2) There is no provision under Cape Act 32 of 1895, or any other Cape statute, for the payment of pension or gratuity to Cape fixed establishment servants who are non-contributors. They had the option, however, under the Railways and Harbours Service Act of joining the Superannuation Fund, and where this has been done they are dealt with on retirement in the manner prescribed for members of the fund. Those who were eligible but did not exercise the option are not entitled by law to any pension or gratuity on retirement, through abolition of office or retrenchment. Those who were ineligible are provided for under section 10 of the Railways and Harbours Service Act.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs: (1) Whether it is a fact that the post office at Steynsrust has been closed, and, if so, if he took into consideration the requirements of the inhabitants of that village and the neighbourhood; and (2) whether, in view of the rapid rise of the said village, he intends to institute an inquiry into the necessity of establishing a regular postal and telegraphic service?

replied: (1) The post office at Steynsrust has been temporarily closed in consequence of no local person being willing to undertake the duties at reasonable remuneration. (2) The reply is in the affirmative.

asked the Minister of the Interior whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the correspondence (subsequent to that published in Blue-book U. 7—1911) which has passed between the Imperial Government and the Union Government on the subject of the Immigration Restriction Bills, 1911, 1912, and 1913?

replied: I should have been glad if the hon. member could have given longer notice of his question, as, in a matter of this kind, it is necessary to consult the Governor-General and the Secretary of State before any definite reply on the subject can be made by the Union Government. I am now in consultation with His Excellency on the subject.

asked the Minister of Justice: (1) Whether it is a fact that some two months ago three convicts named Goodfellow, Roberts and Cloete escaped from Pretoria Central Prison; (2) whether in connection with this three warders named Le Roux, Pirrie and Swanepoel were suspended and charged with neglect of duty; (3) whether three weeks ago the escaped prisoners were recaptured and sentenced for escaping; (4) whether the three suspended warders are still awaiting trial; and, if so, (5) what is the reason for a delay which inflicts hardships on the men charged and is injurious to the discipline of the force?

replied. (1) Yes. (2) Warder Pirrie was not suspended, the other two were. (3) Yes. (4) Yes as regards two of them. (5) The chief delay occurred through the Magistrate’s report on his inquiry being received from him nearly a month after the escape. A further delay occurred owing to the papers having to be sent to Cape Town and back, in connection with the question asked by the hon. member for Liesbeek on the 8th instant. The matter is now in the hands of the Public Prosecutor, and the trial is expected to take place within the next three days.

asked the Minister of Justice: (1) What are the prospects for further promotion of senior subordinate officers in the Prisons Department after attaining chief warder’s rank; (2) can such senior subordinate officers attain the position of officers appointed to the charge of reformatories and industrial schools; and (3) will gratuities be granted to men who do not desire to continue under the regrading scheme on account of losing future pensionable rights attainable under the old system?

replied: (1) In the past commissions have been obtained from the rank. In the future matters regulated by section 14 of the Public Service and Pensions Act and promotions above the rank of chief warder depend upon the Public Service Commission. (2) Yes, if the Public Service Commission recommends them. (3) Not unless they are entitled under the Act of the Province under which they were enrolled.

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours if his attention has been called to the great shortage of trucks existing at Port Elizabeth and other parts of the country, and, if so, what steps are proposed to be taken to remedy this state of affairs? (Cheers.)

Attention has been drawn to the present shortage of trucks at different centres throughout the Union. The Administration is fully cognisant of the position, and its principal officers are keeping closely in touch with the different centres, and doing everything in their power to give an even distribution of stock in keeping with the traffic offering. Traffic at present is particularly heavy, and difficulty is being experienced in coping with the demand for rolling-stock. The position has been accentuated: (1) By the fact that the Transvaal Coal Owners’ Association had orders for 60,000 tons of shipment coal to be despatched between the 2nd and 21st inst. and (2) by the large number of agricultural shows held recently in various parts of the Union, in connection with which it has been necessary to provide considerable truckage for the conveyance of stock, implements, and machinery. These trucks are detained at the show siding until the show is over, and are occasionally despatched direct to another, where the same delay takes place The delay in off-loading shipment and bunker coal at the ports continues to prove a considerable handicap. If the trucks containing this coal were promptly released, the Administration could undoubtedly deal with a largely-increased tonnage with existing stock. Since Union, 2009 trucks have been placed in traffic, with an aggregate carrying capacity of 57.967 tons; 698 of these trucks were placed in traffic last year. One thousand one hundred and twenty-nine trucks are at present on order or in course of erection, with an aggregate capacity of 34,587 tons. Approximately, 795 of these trucks should be placed in traffic before the end of the present year-Six hundred and twenty-six additional trucks, with an aggregate capacity of 15,746 tons, have been authorised, and will shortly be placed on order, or erected locally. In conclusion, he said he had come across a cutting from a German paper, showing that such a state of affairs also existed in Germany. (Laughter.) He did not put that forward as justification, but as a matter of interest. (Laughter.)

Will you order sufficient trucks to meet the requirements?

Will you take steps to expedite the delivery of those trucks?

Is it not a fact that there is often a shortage of locomotives?

Oh, no, no. I cannot allow that.

Will the Minister lay the papers on the Table?

moved: That the petition from L. F. Naude and 54 others, praying for the establishment of a Resident Magistrate’s Court at Rhodes, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 6th March, 1913, be referred to the Government for consideration.

The motion was agreed to.

moved: That in the opinion of this House, section 7 of the Public Service and Pensions Act, 1912, should be so amended that an examination for a higher post will not be required of ex-officers of the late Republics, or of officers who were in service before the commencement of the said Act. In the course of his remarks, Mr. Grobler explained that he had been induced to bring forward the motion owing to an answer to a question which had recently been given by the Minister of the Interior. That answer was to the effect that existing Civil servants and ex-officials of the Republics were not exempt from the promotion examinations. In the first place, the matter concerned all officials who were now in the service. Many of them, particularly those in the Cape, had already passed an examination in order to be admitted in the Civil Service. Now that they had been in the service for a number of years, the Public Service Commission came along and required them to pass another examination. That was not fair. When a man once left school he applied himself to that particular branch of work which he had to perform, and would devote any of his spare time to such part of it as he had a special preference for. But the other sections of work he would leave alone, and after a period of years it would be impossible for him to pass an examination in those other branches of work unless he set to work to study again. More over, the examination required to be passed was a rather difficult one, including some extremely hard subjects requiring considerable study. Why, he asked, should an official in the Native Affairs Department, for instance, be required to study political economy, and what was the use of an examination in that subject? He did not require that knowledge in the course of his work. The examination which people were asked to pass now was more difficult than the intermediate B.A., and, moreover, those who passed that examination had still to pass a supplementary examination in certain subjects If they were asked to pass an examination in the work of their department he could understand it, or on the constitution of the Union. He would have no objection to either of those. But a number of the subjects which officials had to pass in were not necessary. In the Civil Service Act of last year it was laid down in regard to the language clause that officials would not be asked to pass a language test to which they were not subject at the time when they joined the service. Why, then, should they now be asked to pass in such subjects as political economy, which they had not to be acquainted with when they originally joined the service? He pointed to the hardships which would be imposed on these people, who had been in the service for many years, and especially seeing that these people to whom the motion referred were by no means young men, for whom it would be extremely difficult to start studying afresh.

The second group to whom he wished to refer were the ex-officials of the late Republics. When the Bill came before the House he obtained from the Minister assurance that such ex-officials would be exempt from the examinations. It now seemed as if they wanted to expel those people from the public service. In clause 4 it was clearly laid down that such men were exempt from examination, but later on clause 7 had been introduced, and it was on the latter clause that the Public Service Commission was relying. These ex-officials lost their positions owing to the war, and a small proportion of them had been taken on again. They were now more or less in years, and could no longer start to study for examinations. They had a genuine grievance, and the Minister ought to agree that they should be exempted from the proposed examinations. He hoped the motion would be accepted.

seconded the motion.

said that in the hope of ending the discussion he had intervened at a rather earlier stage than usual in the debate. Since these regulations had been published representations had been made from various quarters as to the hardship that would be effected in certain cases on the older officials, and the reasons therefor had been so ably given by the mover of the motion that he need not repeat them again. Certain objections applied to hard and fast regulations in regard to the older officials. In the practical part they would have to show efficiency before they could expect promotion—that is, in the first three groups mentioned in the regulations—but in the special studies they would leave them clone. That would also apply to exofficials of the late Republics who applied for positions. As that would meet his hon. friend, he hoped he would withdraw his motion. For the rest, the regulations would stand, although it was quite conceivable that there might be alterations and modifications.

said that he thought, after the explanation which had been given by his right hon. friend, the hon. member might withdraw his motion, because its effect had been fulfilled before his hon. friend had brought that matter before the House. He (Sir Thomas Smartt) was one of those who had received a considerable number of complaints in regard to the injustice which might have been done if the regulations, as published, had been carried out in their entirety. He had seen his right hon. friend the Prime Minister who, he thought, had met him in a very fair way, and suggested that the Civil Service Commission should come down here and in a round table conference meet the views of both sides. He was extremely glad that the course mentioned by the right hon. Minister had been followed, because a worse thing could not have happened than that the grievances of the Public Service should be approached from any party consideration. He was extremely pleased that the Government had adopted the course they had. He gathered that the committee and the Public Service Commission had come to an understanding which was satisfactory to all parties. He hoped his hon. friend would withdraw his motion until they saw what was the outcome of that Conference, which they hoped would be satisfactory to all concerned in the Public Service.

said that after the explanation of the Minister—namely, that the examination of officials now in service would be limited to the work of their department—he would withdraw his motion.

moved: That the petition from C. J. Coetzee and 72 others, inhabitants of the Strijdpan and Stompiesfontein Settlement in the district of Pretoria, praying for the remission of interest for the first five years on all goods and chattels received from the Government, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 25th February, 1913, be referred to the Government for consideration. The hon. member, who was practically inaudible in the Press Gallery, referred to the hardships which the people referred to in his motion had undergone through drought and other trials. He said there were many poor people at the settlement, and that the animals with which they had been supplied were untrained, and had to be taught. He referred to the remissions which had been received by settlers on the Springbok flats, where in one case, out of £700, £300 was written off, whilst for cattle supplied at a charge of £16 £8 had been written off. Assistance had been similarly given in similar cases in the Orange Free State, in regard to charges for rent. If the motion could not be accepted by the Government, he hoped some remission would be made.

seconded the motion.

said the whole idea of helping these people would be with the object of giving these settlers a chance of advancing. That was what he understood by “help.” Any kind of assistance, however, should be granted on a fixed basis. He wished it to be understood that the remissions made in the case of the Springbok Flats settlements had not been made by the present Union Government, but by the late Government of the Transvaal. Whatever was done must be justifiable so far as the taxpayer was concerned. Whenever settlers had been unable to meet their obligations through no faults of their own, the Government had given them time and had not been hard on them, but they had not been given any presents. The Government had tried to help the people forward, as in the case of Stompiesfontein and Delmas, when after a period of changing fortunes, the settlers were now going ahead. They would be able to come to Parliament later and ask for more money for such settlements. In the meantime they must be prudent in dealing with complaints concerning existing settlements. The Government had already granted a postponement of payment, but they could not give away money out of the pockets of the taxpayers. The people were sympathetically treated, and time was given as well, but to wipe off debt was not possible. Settlements were only possible on a basis of that character.

put the question that the motion be agreed to, and declared that the “Noes” had it.

The motion was therefore negatived.

moved: That the petition of Edward Rooth, on behalf of the Transvalia Land and Exploration Company Ltd., praying that the House may afford the said company means by inquiry of establishing its claim to certain prospecting and other rights in the district of Marico, presented to this House on 27th March, 1913, be referred to a Select Committee for inquiry and report; the committee to have power to take evidence and call for papers, and to consist of the Minister of Mines, Mr. Van der Riet, Sir J. W. S. Langerman, Messrs. Oliver, Vintcent, C. L. Botha and the mover. The mover stated that the contract was for an indefinite period, and was to be renewed from year to year upon a payment of £500. Since the War the question of the title to the land had been called into question, and it had been ascertained that the land did not belong to the company but to the Crown. There had been negotiations between the Minister of Mines and the company. It was advisable that matters should be inquired into, and he hoped that the Government would agree to the appointment of a Select Committee.

seconded the motion.

said the Government had no objection to the granting of a Select Committee, although this was one of several similar questions. If the Select Committee reported favourably to the company a short amendment would have to be introduced. There was an amendment Bill before the House at the present moment, but if the Select Committee found in favour of the company then an amendment could be introduced into that Bill.

said he would like to know more about this. Did he understand that Transvalia was the correct name? This company said it had certain rights, but the late Transvaal Parliament did not acknowledge them. What right had this Government to say it possessed rights in the Transvaal Parliament now? He strongly objected to a speculative company of this sort asking this Union Parliament to go behind the decision of the Transvaal Parliament.

said he would like the Minister to explain exactly the legal position. If these people imagined that they had legal rights to the land then they could go to the Courts and get these rights acknowledged. For his own part he did not think that a Select Committee would bring this question to a satisfactory issue.

pointed out that this contract was originally entered into in the year 1898. In 1898 the ratification of the contract was consented to. The matter dragged on until 1908, when the whole Gold Law of the Transvaal was amended. They then found it necessary in amending the law to deal with certain contracts specifically. Hon. members would find one particular company specifically dealt with in the Act of 1908. Then the Transvalia Co. was overlooked, and it was intended that it should be dealt with under the general provisions of the law of 1908; but subsequently it was found a mistake was made and the general provisions of the law did not cover this case. The Government, before Union, thought of entering into a special arrangement to give these people the rights they had before the law of 1908 was passed. However, it was found that could not be done, and he advised the parties interested to go to the House and ask for a Select Committee, which could go into the whole history of the matter, and then report to the House. If a case was made out then the House could deal with the matter.

The motion was agreed to.

moved that the petition from R. Miller and others, inhabitants of the district of Heidelberg, Cape Province, praying that the said district may be constituted either as a fiscal division or, as an alternative, as the centre of a detached assistant resident magistracy, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 3rd March, 1913 be referred to the Government for consideration.

seconded.

said there was rather an important question involved in this. If this resolution was carried and was given effect to by the Government, it meant the creation of another fiscal division in the Cape Province. That meant also another Divisional Council Divisional Councils came under the Provincial Councils, so he wanted to represent to the Government that this was a matter that could be dealt with by the Provincial Council. They should say whether further Divisional Councils should be created. As a matter of fact, the Provincial Council of the Cape Province were going to consider an Ordinance for the purpose of unifying certain separate local bodies. Here they had a motion that will divide one local body into two local bodies.

said he thought the hon. member’s idea was rather dangerous. No doubt the Provincial Council dealt with the creation of Divisional Councils, but the Divisional Council had first to be created before it came under the Provincial Council’s jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, consequences far beyond the Provincial Council would follow on the creation of this fiscal division. It would mean a great deal of extra expenditure on the part of the Union Government, so he thought the matter was rightly dealt with by this Parliament.

hoped the Minister of Finance did not forget that the Government would have to present a report to this House on the matter. He thought there was a great deal in what the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, said. So long as they had Provincial Councils, this House should be extremely careful not to interfere with their privileges, and where they had a Divisional Council, it was a very serious thing for the Government to think of establishing a new Divisional Council without discussing the matter with the representative of the Provincial Council. He thought the Government should first get the views of the Provincial Council before dealing with this matter.

thought the hon. member would see that it would not do for the Government to put reports before the House on matters of this sort. The usual course was for the Government, when it received a resolution of the House, to either leave it alone or bring something before the House.

Leave it alone is the most probable.

There is virtue in leaving things alone sometimes.

Yes; and leaving things alone is rather a characteristic of the Government, isn’t it? (Laughter.)

said the Union Government always consulted with the Provincial Council on matters of this sort, and he was glad to say it resulted in harmonious working between the two bodies.

said he would like to say that the Minister of the Interior took a very easy view of resolutions of Parliament. He thought he took an entirely wrong view of the responsibilities of the Government in regard to such matters. Parliament passed a resolution referring a matter to the Government for consideration, and it could call upon the Government at any time to say what was the result of that resolution. He did not know where the Minister got his ideas from on the matter —whether it was from responsible government of the Free State, which he administered so much to its advantage and his own. (Laughter.)

The motion was agreed to.

had previously given notice to move that in the opinion of this House the Government should at an early date introduce amendments to the Miners’ Phthisis Act, 1912, providing: (1) that a miner who has been awarded benefits under sub-section (1) (a) of section 21 of that Act on the ground that his capacity for underground work is not seriously or permanently impaired should not be debarred from applying, within twelve months, to be dealt with under sub-section (1) (b) if he has reason to believe that his capacity has since become seriously or permanently impaired; and (2) that the Board should be allowed in special cases under sub-section (1) (b) to award a monthly benefit up to £12 per month, not exceeding £400 in all. He said that since the motion had been on the paper he had made inquiries, and was glad to find that the Government had administered the present law in such a way that there was no necessity for the first part of the motion at all. And the present law also dealt with what he asked for in clause 2. He would therefore withdraw the motion.

The motion was withdrawn.

moved that the petition from Helena Bishop, widow, who in 1901 obtained permission from the Cape Agricultural Department to erect a building on certain waste land for the sale of refreshments, but against whom an order for eviction has now been obtained, praying that she may be granted either fixity of tenure or adequate compensation, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 8th April, 1913, be referred to the Government for consideration. He said that the circumstances in connection with this petition were well known to the Minister, and were also known to a good many members of that House. (Hear, hear.) The facts, broadly stated, were that this lady was granted leave to use a certain piece of land near Camps Bay, where she settled some years ago, and she now desired to have some fixity of tenure, or to be paid adequate compensation if she were ejected. The petition was not framed in terms that he personally approved, but he thought that the petitioner might fairly be granted a lease of this particular site at a fair ground rent.

seconded the motion.

said that it was very seldom a motion referring a petition to the Government for consideration was actively opposed, and he did not want to actively oppose it in this case, but he thought if hon. members knew the rights and wrongs of this matter they would find it impossible to agree with the motion. This woman had been defying every Ministry in the Cape for many years. (A VOICE: Since 1904.) Here they had a gentleman, simply from good nature, he supposed, moving in this matter in the House. The exorbitant rent required from this lady was £1 per annum. Some years ago a former Cape Minister took the responsibility of obtaining an eviction order against this lady. She came crying to members and the Minister, and they let the matter drag on, so that by the time Union was started the order was so old that it could not be put into force. She was not satisfied with this. She went on extending her territory and annexing ground to the ground that she had, but she had gone one step further, and had issued proclamations against men who went round there along the coast. An ultimatum was eventually given to this sovereign lady of Camps Bay that she had to come to terms, and that was that she could get a lease on the very short notice she had had before, and, although she would not be entitled to compensation for anything that she had put upon that land, the Government felt that it would not be fair in the case of a poor lady to dispossess her without giving compensation for improvements she had made. The matter was tested in the Supreme Court, and when tested there the amount was found to be perfectly fair. An order was obtained against her, because she would not sign the lease on the terms she had agreed to all along of £1 per annum. As to the legal costs, it was proposed that she could pay these off by monthly instalments. In the face of having troubled almost every member of Parliament, charitable association and church organisation, she now came to Parliament and petitioned for relief. The Government had got their hands full, this matter had been under their consideration for years, and it should not be again sent to the Government. What more the petitioner could expect than the terms they had offered he did not know.

said that this lady apparently with considerable intelligence had taken to heart the parable of the importunate widow. He hoped that the Minister would entirely sweep aside all these little matters of legal costs and that the House would look at the matter from the other side. Here was a person who had been in a place for ten or twelve years and had built up a home there. He had not alluded to the £1 a year ground rent. He had said that the petitioner should pay a fair ground rent, but that she should be given greater security of tenure. As regarded the legal costs, he would suggest that they were secured by any compensation that the petitioner would be entitled to.

The motion was negatived.

moved: That the petition from F. Barber and 268 others, workmen employed in the Pretoria Locomotive Workshops of the South African Railways, in opposition to the introduction of piecework in the Railway Workshops, Pretoria, and praying for the appointment of a Commission to investigate matters relating thereto, presented to this House on the 19th February, 1913, be referred to the Government for consideration.

The motion was agreed to.

moved: That in the opinion of this House it is desirable that the Standing Orders be so amended that by means of a debate on an address in reply to the Governor-General’s speech or some stage of the necessary business of the House, there shall be given adequate opportunity of challenging the policy of the Government of the day. He said it appeared to him that every session it was vastly to the advantage of the business of the House if the method of having a debate on the address was adopted. He put it to hon. members that for the first fortnight after coming here they were really doing nothing. The debate on the Budget, however exhaustive it might be, from the very fact of the immense area of ground that it covered usually proved a, most unsatisfactory method of testing any particular branch of policy. By an amendment on the address they could focus the discussion on particular points instead of having a debate, as they had on the Budget, which wandered all round the place from gal-lamziekte to the sugar industry. He submitted for the consideration of this House that the adoption of the time-honoured procedure of the House of Commons would vastly facilitate the business of this House, and greatly add to its usefulness. He would only anticipate one criticism, and that was that they would have it all over again on the Budget. Did that take place in the House of Commons? Surely it was an accepted principle in the House of Commons that the debate on the Budget was a debate on the financial policy of the Government.

The motion was negatived.

moved: That the petition from F. E. Slavin, widow of the late Luke Slavin, a pensioner who died in 1907, praying for consideration of her advanced age and poverty, and for relief, presented to this House on the 10th June, 1912, be laid upon the Table, and, if agreed to, that it be referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants, and Gratuities.

The motion was agreed to.

moved: That the petition from D. J. Retief, praying that a break of two and a half years in his service as teacher under the Education Department (Cape), may be condoned for good service allowance purposes, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 18th June, 1912, be laid upon the Table, and, if agreed to, that it be referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants and Gratuities.

The motion was agreed to.

for Mr. C. L. Botha (Bloemfontein), moved: That the petitions from E. E. Watkeys and 723 others, inhabitants of Bloemfontein, and J. G. Putterill and 88 others, inhabitants of Harrismith, praying for legislation providing for the direct popular veto, whereby men and women may decide by ballot on the continuance, reduction, or issue of liquor licences, or for other relief, presented to this House on the 10th April, 1913, be referred to the Government for consideration.

The motion was agreed to.

moved: That in the opinion of this House the Government should consider the advisability of placing on the Supplementary Estimates a sufficient sum for encouraging the destruction of vermin, especially the red and silver jackals and the red cat. In the course of his remarks, Mr. Grobler said it was not his purpose to cause the Government to incur a larger expenditure, but merely to use the money already on the Estimates in a different way. There was already on the Estimates an amount of £12,000 for the extermination of vermin, which sum should be spent as it used to be spent at the Cape, namely, in paying, out rewards on production of evidence of the death of the jackals. That system had worked very well, and the money would be well spent. The Government was spending thousands of pounds for the eradication of scab, but this disease would not be eradicated so long as nothing was done for the destruction of vermin, and sheep had to be taken into the kraals every night. The society which existed for the destruction of vermin kept good dogs, and did a lot of excellent work, but the other societies did not do much. If the Government would only pay a certain premium for the destruction of every jackal, he held that natives and farmers would try and earn that premium, and that something useful would be done for the destruction of vermin and the protection of stock.

seconded the motion.

said under the Financial Relations Bill it was intended to have the question of the destruction of vermin referred to the Provinces. The conditions in the various Provinces in regard to vermin were very different, making it very difficult for the Union Parliament to deal with the question. In these circumstances he hoped the hon. member would not press his motion.

said in his district they were most anxious to get rid of jackals and wild cats, but he wished to know how he would be circumstanced if the matter were left to the Provinces. For instance, some of the kopjes on his estate were located in the Free State, but there were others just over the border in Griqualand West, so it would not help him if all the vermin of the Free State portion of his estate were killed and others were left alive in the Cape portion of his estate. It would be a disadvantage to refer such matters to local bodies. Two years ago the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet brought the matter before the House in an excellent speech. He (Dr. Watkins) hoped the Minister would again very carefully consider the question, and would see that it was kept in the hands of the Union Government, or that arrangements were made that there should be unanimous action and not for one Province to have one policy and another Province another policy.

urged the necessity of uniformity being achieved in regard to this matter. He pointed out that in the Cape, since the Government had ceased doing something, the evil had greatly increased. Personally, he had intended moving an amendment to add “wild dogs” to the motion, but seeing that the Government proposed referring the matter to the Provincial Councils it would be useless for him to do so. He regretted that such a matter was to be left in the hands of the Provincial Council, seeing that whilst one Council would take action another would not. The vermin were doing a lot of mischief to cattle, and in Bechuanaland the evil they were responsible for was remarkable.

said he was very glad to see that the principle of the State doing something in connection with this matter was being recognised. There was a time when Parliament would not recognise that this was a State question. He was afraid that the matter was being treated in too niggardly a fashion altogether. If the problem were tackled at once in a resolute way and a sufficient sum of money was spent from the start the vermin would gradually diminish, but if they went on spending these driblets the trouble would last for ever. A good deal had been done under the old Cape system, but unfortunately there was no continuity of policy.

It was abused.

said a lot of mistakes were made at the commencement, but they were learning as they went on, and a good deal of good was done. Then all of a sudden the system was abandoned, so that the money previously spent might just as well have been thrown away. He was sorry the question was being complicated by including other vermin, the jackal being at the root of the trouble, while the other vermin could easily be destroyed. In this case he thought they might follow the example of other countries. The loss to the country was almost inconceivable and being a State matter he thought that it was essential to inaugurate a uniform policy for the whole of South Africa.

also urged the importance of the question, which he said was a national one. Unless the State took some action the evil would spread. But the Government themselves were the greatest sinners, as they farmed with jackals—(laughter)—in the districts of Graham’s Town, Alexandria, etc. The evil was a serious one, and steps should be taken to combat it. Mr. Vosloo went on to point to what legislation had been passed in the olden days. Arguments had been used in those days that considerable frauds were perpetrated in the sale of bogus jackal, tails, but that was nonsense. In his opinion the motion should be adopted. If it were not adopted it should be brought forward year after year until it was.

said he was surprised at the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet declaring that this was a State matter. He considered that there was too much spoon-feeding, so far as the farmers were concerned; besides, he did not think that the Government would make a success of jackal hunting. This reliance on the Government could be carried too far. It was the farmers who should deal with the trouble, and not the Government. He hoped the House would not accept the motion.

in supporting the motion, said the jackals were such a serious evil that active steps should be taken. Jackals were responsible for scab, veld erosion, and other evils. In these circumstances, he hoped the motion would be passed, and money voted for the purpose of vermin destruction. It was eminently a matter for State action. Only a sheep farmer knew what mischief these vermin caused.

said jackals were annually responsible for the loss of thousands of pounds. Farmers could do very little, because the jackals on the Crown lands were the greatest evil-doers of all. (Hear, hear.) Unless a reward was offered for the destruction of vermin, very little could be achieved. He was glad the Government recognised it was a matter for the State to deal with. The hon. member for Umlazi was surprised that the motion had the support of the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet. Well, there were no doubt other things which would astonish the hon. member. The majority of people did not quite grasp the importance of the question. Every year the jackal did damage to the extent of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of pounds. In the speaker’s district there were enormous pieces of Crown land, and there the jackal was allowed to multiply. Of course, it was a matter for the Government. If a premium was paid the shepherds would do their best to get hold of as many jackals as possible, but unless there was a reward there was no incentive for them to do that. It was not so easy to catch a jackal. The animal was artful, and could not readily be captured in a trap, nor would he, as a rule, take poison. The extermination of this pest was just as important as the extermination of scab.

said that too little had been said as to what the farmer himself would contribute towards the eradication of jackals. They should come to the Government, and show what they had done, or were doing, before they asked for assistance. He favoured a £ for £ system.

referred to the experiences of farmers in his district, which were to the effect that neither jackal-proof fences nor poison had any effect. Should it happen that a jackal was poisoned, the others would not afterwards touch the stuff. In his district farmers had co-operated, and had formed “Arms Clubs.” They had bought dogs, with which they had achieved the greatest success. In his district the vermin had been destroyed, and the jackal was at present a practically unknown enemy. Farmers should emulate the example of the people of his district. The Provincial Council would do well by encouraging such clubs, and making these clubs a small allowance towards the payment of the expenses of the dogs. They had promised to do that. The only way to exterminate jackals was by means of dogs. The Government could give information as to the best way of obtaining the dogs.

said the question was a national one. Jackals should be destroyed throughout the country. Even if jackals’ tails were brought in from the desert, he held that it was to the interest of the country that even in the desert jackals were destroyed. Farmers in his district had gone to great expense in the erection of jackal-proof fences, but this was useless, and he urged the necessity of the Government taking drastic measures. He also urged that farmers should be supplied with poison by the magistrate at low prices. The extermination of jackals should not be left to the Provincial Councils, as the animal wandered about, and extermination in only one Province would not help them. The price of a bottle of poison had increased from 2s. 6d. to 10s., and negligent farmers would not pay 10s. It was time they were shown their duty.

said if the hon. member for Umlazi (Mr. Fawcus) had known a little more about jackals he would not have spoken in the way he had done. It would not help them to destroy jackals in the Cape if nothing was done in the Free State; he held the Government should take steps to meet the farmers. This was neither a private nor a provincial matter, but a Union matter, which should be tackled with energy. (Hear, hear.) He hoped the motion would be agreed to. He knew what trouble the jackal caused in the district of Swellendam.

said the Government should supply poison at cost prices. That was all they wanted and the farmers themselves would do the rest. Poor farmers could not pay high prices for poison, and in the present circumstances were unable to do anything at all. As far as dogs were concerned, they might be good, but they were also very dear. With poison supplied at cost price they could destroy as many jackals as with dogs.

said he was very sorry that it had become a provincial matter, because he thought it was a national matter. The Government interested themselves in the eradication of scab, and he thought eradication of vermin should have been kept in the hands of the Union Government also, but unless the policy was changed they would have to abide by the course that had been adopted. It would be a disadvantage if one of the Provinces, anxious to get rid of the pest, found it necessary to pay a large amount while another Provincial Council, not so desirous of; getting rid of vermin, or perhaps not having the same difficulties with their stock, were only prepared to pay a small amount. Therefore, he thought they should ask the Government to urge upon the Provincial Councils the desirability of uniformity, and he proposed an amendment in the second line, after the words “advisability of” to delete all the words down to “encouraging,” and to substitute “urging on the Provincial Councils uniformity in paying for proofs in.”

supported the motion as the question was a national one. This was not a matter in which they asked for spoon-feeding, because, after all, jackals were found on Government lands as well as on private lands. He hoped the amendment would not he accepted, as he objected to the Union Parliament giving instructions to the Provincial Council. The motion was not only in the interests of the cattle farmers, but also in the interests of the meat users in the large towns, and the hon. member for Gape Town, Central, ought to support it. If the jackal were exterminated, meat would become cheaper.

seconded the amendment, and pointed out that the hon. members opposite were not the only ones who possessed jackals in their constituencies. They had a large number of those noxious vermin in Natal. That was why he seconded the amendment, which he hoped the House would carry. They could not beep them down by ordinary means Their own experience was that the Provincial Councils tackled the matter better than the Government had done before. These jackals spread right along the veld, and the trouble was becoming so serious that many farmers had to give up the breeding of sheep because they had suffered very great losses on account of the jackals. These vermin spread as far as Dundee, and they were spreading all through the Colony. He believed that the Provincial Councils could better cope with the pest than Pretoria. (An HON. MEMBER: Why?) Certainly as far as Natal was concerned he wanted to see the matter in the hands of the Provincial Councils.

thought the methods of vermin destruction should be left to the Government’s discretion, because of the difficult conditions prevailing in the various parts of the country. The method of killing the jackals with dogs would not have any effects on the large farms. In his district, where there were mostly large farms, poison had always proved very effective, and in such districts the Government should supply poison on as easy terms as possible. If that were done, the people would be ready to pay rewards to the shepherds for the destruction of the jackals. He hoped the Government would take strong action to see what could be done.

put the question that the original words remain part of the motion, and declared the “Ayes” had it.

The amendment was accordingly negatived.

The motion was agreed to.

moved: That the petition from W. Makenana, of Uitenhage, who was retired from the railway service as unfit for duty about six years ago after eighteen years’ service, praying for consideration of the circumstances of his case and his helpless crippled condition, and for relief, presented to this House on the 23rd May, 1912, be laid upon the Table of the House, and, if agreed to, that it be referred to the Select Committee on Pensions, Grants, and Gratuities.

The motion was agreed to.

moved: That the Government be requested to introduce, at an early date, legislation prohibiting members of Parliament from trading with any Government Department. The mover said that it seemed to him that this was very like patience rewarded. He had raised the question several weeks ago. He thought that, generally speaking, members of public bodies, like members of Parliament, should have their hands absolutely free in matters of business between them and the Government. Even in the mother of Parliaments there was considerable sensitiveness upon this point, and they prohibited any member of Parliament from selling to the Government any article of use. He was quite certain that if such a motion were carried it would have a very wide sweep. They had had that experience in Natal. A few years ago they had a case in Natal where two hon. members, one a member of the Government and one who afterwards became a member of the Government, who, according to the Natal Law, had resigned their positions. Only recently there had been a very serious discussion in the Mother of Parliaments, where Sir Stuart Samuel sold silver to the Indian Government, and in consequence of that he had to resign his seat. There was a general feeling throughout the Union that no member of Parliament should be allowed to do any trade with the Government. It seemed to him that some simple Act of Parliament should be passed to prevent any member of Parliament having any business transactions with the Government whereby he might derive profit.

seconded the motion.

said he would like to support the motion of the hon. member for Roodepoort because there was always some suspicion lurking in the public mind, although he did not know that there were any members of that House that did any trading with the Government. An Act such as the hon. member suggested would go a long way to prevent corruption.

said he thought that everyone in that House was in complete sympathy with the motion, but there were so many things to do and so many things that had to be turned into law, that they must try and find out what were the most important.

said he agreed with the Minister, as he considered the motion as it stood to be too imperative. He moved to delete the words “at an early date,” and to insert in their place “Consider the advisability of introducing.”

seconded the amendment.

said it seemed to him that both the resolution and the amendment were unnecessary. They had a standing order upon the matter, and would it not be possible for that standing order to take this matter into consideration? It could be revised. It had been mentioned by the Minister that no specific case had been brought before the House. He did not think they should wait for one. It was possible for hon. members to tender for Government supplies, and, as a matter of fact, they did so. He thought the House should take such steps as might be deemed necessary to bring about a more stringent rule with regard to this matter.

hoped the Minister would find himself so busy with his other legislation that he would not be able to trouble about this. It was quite unnecessary in a country of this sort, and it was quite impossible to carry out the ideas put before the House by Mr. Haggar. All their Government purchases were put up to tender, and the Government did not decide without the help of the Tender Board, which was an independent Board. If the Government took the responsibility of passing over the recommendation of the Tender Board it would be dealt with by the auditor, and the matter would be reported to Parliament. Then this House could demand from the Government an explanation of their action.

said it was quite true that in the Cape Province they had got a system by which any member of a School Board who did business with the Board was expelled from the Board. In a town like Cape Town, with its big population, that worked all right, but in a small place it did not. It excluded the very best men from the School Board, and militated against education. There were men, as a matter of fact, who were now sitting on School Boards, and who, according to the Act, should be excluded. But they were such good men that the department allowed them to sit there. Municipal Councils were dealt with in the same way, and the result was that in small places the most able men were excluded from the Town Councils. And they had got men on the Councils who ought not to be there. With Divisional Councils they had the same system, but there they had not the same difficulties, because most Divisional Councillors were elected from the district outside the towns. He hoped Government would not introduce legislation as had been suggested.

said he entirely disagreed with the hon. gentleman who had just spoken. He was surprised that the hon. member for Port Elizabeth, Central, should so lightly throw over an English precedent. In England there was a law that no person who contracted with the Government could sit in the House of Commons, and a very proper law it was. It did not apply to members of companies which contracted with Government, but only to individual members of the House who entered into contracts with the Government. As regarded Divisional Councils and Town Councils in this country, it certainly kept those institutions very free from what was called corruption. It was only the other day that they were shown that those interested in the Government should be free from any outside dealings with the Government. (Hear, hear.) It was a very sound principle indeed, and while he agreed with his hon. friend (Sir E. H. Walton) that perhaps there was legislation that it was necessary to deal with at an early date, still he thought this was legislation that should be dealt with before long. South Africa was as free in its public life as any country from corruption, but let them stop the temptation hon. members might be put to. Argue as they would, the fact remained that where their interests were their actions were likely to be guided thereby. He was quite aware that the hon. member for Port Elizabeth, Central, had said that they had regulations in regard to tenders, and he quite believed that tenders in this country were dealt with in a manner above suspicion—(hear, hear)—but he would point out to his hon. friend that those regulations could be altered any day. The regulations they had got in the Cape came about as the result of a scandal in connection with the refreshment contract. A number of members interested in a particular Government’s existence for the time being might become nothing but place hunters.

said he would point out to his hon. friend the Minister of Justice that so far as hon. members on his own side of the House were concerned, they might have a little more difficulty in dealing with this matter than he imagined. He seemed to think it was a question of very easy solution in this country. He thought the House would agree with his hon. friend (Sir E. H. Walton) that they should be very careful about doing anything which would have a tendency to show that members of Parliament in their business transactions were placed in a better position than members of the public in getting anything out of the State. The Minister of Justice seemed to have forgotten that we had in the Railway Department in this country a large consuming department which happened to be a department of State, and which was not the case in Great Britain, and if the ideas of his hon. friend were carried out the public on the railways would not have the opportunity of sampling some of the Cape wines that they had been in the habit of consuming in the past, because those Cape wines had private brands and were produced by individual farmers. People who came from the Old Country asked for particular brands. In the same manner they asked for particular fruits, and fruits grown by his hon. friend the Minister of Justice might be placed under this ban. Ho thought the whole question should be very fully considered by the Government, and that they should carefully weigh the advantages and disadvantages of a measure of this sort in a country situated as South Africa was. He thought the amendment of the hon. member for Caledon was a very reasonable one. Hon. members who were members of the National Convention would remember that this was one of the subjects discussed by that body, but various difficulties, such as he had mentioned, were brought forward, and therefore no provision was made in the Act regarding the matter. Government should consider the subject with a view to seeing that the public were protected so that no member of Parliament should get any advantage out of the State. In the Cape, contracts were dealt with by a Tender Board, and if any Government had interfered with that body’s decision it would not have escaped the censure of Parliament or the public.

said the arguments used by the hon. member for Fort Beaufort did not appear to carry much force. That a certain number of gentlemen should have to choose between selling their wines to the Government or retiring from Parliament was a matter for those gentlemen themselves to settle. (Hear, hear.) The country might not suffer by the exercise of their choice. He entirely agreed with the Minister of Justice that Government should rather err on the side of the prevention of the growth of what was called graft, for no one would for a moment suggest that the votes of any hon. member were affected in the least degree by their having wine for sale on the railways. At the same time, this was the sort of thing that was apt to grow. If a man wanted a seat in Parliament he should not trade with the Government. It was not a great sacrifice to ask a person to make.

said that if such a Bill was brought up in the House, he would support it, but he thought they should see where they were going and what they were doing. He agreed with the hon. member for Jeppe that the House should be above suspicion in a matter of this kind, but he thought a Bill of this kind would materially limit the choice of the people of the country, so far as members of Parliament were concerned. He pointed out the case of the Johannesburg Town Council, which lost the services of several of its most able men when such a measure was brought into effect. He contended that the voice of the people of Johannesburg, in so far as municipal representatives were concerned, was materially limited. Of course, it did not affect the hon. members on the cross-benches. They did not engage in business. Other members of the House were not so fortunate. Most of them had other businesses, and they had to come down here as well. He asked hon. members on the cross-benches if any member of the House could influence a vote of the House in favour of himself or his friends?

There are lots of ways.

I know of no way. Perhaps the ingenuous mind of the hon. member for Jeppe could give us an instance. Continuing, he said he would support such a Bill, but he was only putting forward the ordinary view. Candidly, he did not see who could influence a vote on a money matter. Who could do so?

The Press.

The Press?

The almighty Press. (Laughter.)

He was convinced that the country was amply protected now, and there was no breath of suspicion towards any member in those matters, and if they put on a law of that kind, they would materially limit the choice of the people of the country in the selection of the members of that House. The hon. Minister of Justice had spoken of English precedent, but he was not so sure that English precedent had so much influence with the hon. Minister as on that occasion.

said that he would like to call attention to the fact that matters in South Africa were not on all fours with Great Britain. He pointed out that in South Africa the Government carried on a great part of the commerce of the country, and if such a law as had been referred to was introduced, hon. members would be precluded from buying from the Government. He thought it was more a question of the profits of the individual and the profits of a seat in the House of Assembly. It appeared to him, however, that the country was sufficiently protected. The Government was a large trading concern in this country, and the tendency seemed to be to wish to extend that. If they adopted such a principle as was recommended, the people with whom the Government trade would be very much circumscribed. He was inclined to oppose the motion.

said that the hon. member for Troyeville seemed to be on the horns of a dilemma. He did not say that in a personal sense, but it seemed to him that the hon. member wanted to serve God and Mammon at the same time. He said he would be in favour of the principle which would be embodied in the Bill brought forward, but the same principle which would have been embodied in that Bill was laid down in the recommendation of the hon. member for Roodepoort. With regard to the point he tried to make regarding the Johannesburg Town Council being prevented from containing many able men, who would otherwise have been eligible to sit on the Council, if it were not for the clause in the constitution which prevented a member sitting on the Council if he was interested in any contract that came forward, he (Mr. Boydell) would say that the hon. member was going on the assumption that the rich man, and men in large commercial undertakings, were the people with a monopoly of brains, and could not be done without; but since there had been some new blood in the Johannesburg Town Council, in the shape of men who had no axes to grind— the representatives of the S.A. Labour Party—the dealings of that municipal body had been cleaner and freer from corruption than ever they were. It was not very long ago that they had a scandal, where the contractors were trying to exercise an undue influence upon the Council, and it was members of the Labour Party that exposed the whole affair.

said he was glad that he did not belong to the party who threw mud and hit below the belt. The Minister of the Interior forgot that this motion had been on the paper for several weeks. He was not pressing it. He simply wanted the principle to be recognised, and the nature of the debate justified him in introducing the motion. The hon. member for Somerset East gave them an idea of the bad behaviour of the people in his constituency. They had a law against stealing. Let them do away with the law. They had a law against killing. Do away with that law also. He simply wanted to direct the hon. member’s attention to standing rule No. 13. The hon. member for Georgetown said they did not want a scandal. He brought up this motion because things were not right, and when he made that statement he was prepared to prove it. Hon. members would remember that in the Natal Parliament he exposed the scandal which was deliberately hushed up. He had great pleasure in accepting the amendment, and he hoped that a step would be taken in the right direction to remove any suspicion in the minds of the public that there was any collusion between hon. members and the Government in matters of trade.

The amendment was agreed to.