from S. C. J. van Niekerk and 104 others, inhabitants of the town and district of Elliot, praying that the district of Elliot may be created a separate fiscal division.

Estimates of revenue and expenditure year ended 31st March, 1914 (Orange Free State); Return of Special Warrants issued during the period of 25th April, 1913, to 23rd May, 1913.

This return was referred to the Select Committee on Public Accounts.

When are you going to publish the accounts of the Railway Department for the financial year ending March 31?

I cannot tell the hon. member now, but I will inquire into the matter.

The Bill was set down for second reading on Thursday next.

referred to sub-section 6, which is as follows: “Every such person may appeal to the board having jurisdiction under this section. For the purposes of this subsection ‘person’ shall include an alien, saving the prerogative of the Crown.” Mr. Alexander said the words “saving the prerogative of the Crown” were unnecessary, and were calculated to lead to litigation. The Minister evidently wished to be more royalist than the Crown in this matter. The words “saving the prerogative of the Crown” had no meaning whatever, and the only result of their inclusion would be to cast a doubt as to whether aliens had a right to appeal to the Board.

These words cast doubt upon an alien being able to appeal to the Board. Either the Minister had made a concession, or he had not. If he had made a concession, then these words ought to come out, and if he had not made a concession, then these words were obscure, and the House should realise the position. He moved to delete the words “saving the prerogative of the Crown.”

hoped the Minister would consider the amendment favourably. He did not know what meaning would be attached to the words “saving the prerogative of the Crown.” In any case, he did not think they were necessary, and would lead to confusion.

said he had endeavoured to meet his hon. friends, and yet they seemed dissatisfied. The idea was to allow an alien to appeal to the Board, but not to the Courts. But this appeal must not interfere with the prerogative of the Crown. Take the case of a dangerous anarchist, they would not allow him to appeal to the Board.

pointed out that he thought there must be some misunderstanding. The idea was that an alien should have the right to appeal to a Board, but his right hon. friend proposed that an alien should not have the right to appeal. If a bad character arrived, they would not allow him the right of appeal, but there might be the case of a perfectly good man arriving who wanted to appeal to the Board, and he might not have the right to appeal at all. He heartily supported the amendment of his hon. friend the member for Cape Town, Castle.

thought the right hon. gentleman had not made out a strong case for retaining these words. What was the prerogative of the Crown? The Minister quoted the case of a bad character, but if he was a British subject he had at all times the right to appeal to the Court. A concession was given with one hand and taken away with the other. He hoped the Minister would see that these words, if allowed to remain, would be a source of weakness and danger.

said his right hon. friend would admit that in the passing of the Bill he had had a good deal of assistance from members of both sides of the House. They had appealed to his right hon. friend to allow an alien the right of appeal over the head of the Immigration Officer to the Immigration Board, now the Minister proposed to take away that right under clause 3, which did not allow the alien the right to appeal to the Board. He hoped the Minister would agree to the deletion of the words.

said he would like to remind the Minister what took place before. The Minister seemed to suggest that what he (Mr. Chaplin) wanted was that the alien should have a right of appeal to the Court, but what he said was that he should have a right to appeal to the Board. He thought that the Minister must have misunderstood the position, for it was certainly made clear that an alien should have the right of appeal for the purposes of this section only.

said there was no doubt as to what the understanding was. In their eyes the Minister did make a distinct concession and agreed that the right should be confined to this clause only.

said that his right hon. friend was quite aware of what was intended and the nature of the agreement. It was not quite clear, therefore, what was the reason of this uneasiness.

What was the agreement?

I was not here. (Laughter.) It was quite clear, he continued, that an alien should be given the right to appeal to this Board. (Hear, hear.) That being the effect his right hon. friend had no objection.

The amendment was agreed to.

The amendment as amended was agreed to.

New clause 3 and clause 4 were verbally amended.

On clause 5,

moved in sub-section (e) the deletion of the words “of parents then domiciled” for the purpose of substituting the words “whose parents were then domiciled therein.”

thought that the Minister should omit the words “of parents then domiciled.”

No, certainly not.

said that thousand’s would be affected by the clause. He referred to the Indians in Natal, and said that those born in the country would be denied their rights.

said he agreed with what had been said by the hon. member for Cape Town, Castle.

said he was opposed to the suggestion, and pointed out that other parts of the country were affected greatly by these wandering people. In the Eastern Province they were a serious menace.

was understood to say that he thought the proposal unfair.

said there was a distinct promise that existing rights would not be taken away. If existing rights were safeguarded he did not think there was any need for them to go further.

said he thought that the point had been fairly put by the hon. member for Cape Town, Castle, and that it deserved the consideration of the Minister. It was very difficult for the Court to come to a decision on a question of this sort.

said he hoped that some Minister would rise in his place and settle the point raised by the hon. member for Weenen. They had a distinct understanding, as he gathered, the other night that nothing in this clause should take away rights which had already been conferred or already existed at the time of Union in the Indian community.

put the question that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause, and declared that the “Noes” had it.

said he hoped that some member of the Ministry would enlighten them as to the effect of this amendment. It was most inconvenient that they could not properly discuss the clause at this stage. The point was whether this was not a matter which concerned the Indians in Natal merely, or a matter which concerned all people. (Hear, hear.)

said that his right hon. friend had asked him to state that the alteration which was now proposed to be made was merely intended by the draftsman as an improvement upon the previous form. It was not proposed to have the effect of making any difference whatever to the rights which people had. Those who had a domicile were provided for, themselves, their wives and their children. It was not, proposed to affect detrimentally any rights which already existed.

said he did not think this was really a draftsman’s alteration. (Hear, hear.) He thought there was a material difference between the original amendment and the one now proposed.

said that what they would like to know was what effect this was going to have, not as a change upon the amendment made in committee, but in itself, upon the rights of persons who might be born in South Africa, but whose parents at the time of the birth of these children were not domiciled in South Africa. He thought the Government should consider whether it was worth while making an amendment in order to prevent what, after all, was not a very serious matter.

said that the two amendments seemed to him to differ essentially. Whatever the intention might be, the effect was quite different. As the clause now stood, if the parents were domiciled in South Africa if they happened to be on the water when a child was born to them, under this clause the child would be exempted, but under the amendment which stood on the paper as proposed by the right hon. gentleman, that child would not be exempted, because under that amendment that child must be born in South Africa.

said that if the effect of putting in these new words was to make it possible, while the Free State was protected from the influx of Asiatics and Natal had a very large number of Asiatics, for the Cape to be open to Asiatics coming from Natal, he thought the representatives of the Cape would be disregarding their duty to the people whom they represented, if they did nothing to make it impossible for Natal Indians to come into the Cape Colony whenever they liked.

said that this clause purported to deal with children whose parents were domiciled in South Africa at the time of their marriage. Supposing the parents were not so domiciled on the day of the child’s birth, but on the following day, what was the position of the child?

said that there seemed to him to be a great deal of fuss about what appeared to be very little. He personally thought they should not give the right to a child to come back to this, country, say 20 years after his birth, if he happened to be here at the time his parents were passing through.

said that, as far as the Cape was concerned, he saw great danger ahead of them. The Free State was protected by this Act, as none of these children would be allowed into the Free State. As far as Natal was concerned, it had legislation that no Asiatic, whether born in the country or not, should be allowed to have a trading licence. They had not got those laws in the Cape, and consequently they would be flooded in the Cape in a very short time by these people coming from Natal and competing in their trade. He thought the effect of this amendment should be carefully considered, and he moved that the Bill be re-committed to consider subsection (e) of clause 5.

seconded.

The motion was negatived.

then put the question that the words proposed to be inserted stand part of the clause, and declared that the “ Ayes ” had it.

called for a division, but subsequently withdrew’ his demand.

moved in paragraph (f), line 37, as an amendment to the amendment, to omit the words “does not come under paragraphs (e) or (f),” and to substitute “is not such a person as is described in paragraphs (e) or (f).”

moved in sub-section (f) to insert at the end of the sub-section “or who has been removed under section 22 of this Act.” The mover remarked that without his amendment clause 22 was of no effect.

said the hon. member had omitted the material word “not.” The Minister moved the insertion of the word “not” between “has” and “been.”

The amendments were agreed to.

On paragraph (h), which provides that the following persons shall not be prohibited immigrants, viz., persons of European descent, who are agricultural or domestic servants, skilled artisans, mechanics, workmen, or miners, and who have entered the Union under conditions which the Governor-General has approved (on being satisfied that there is not sufficient supply available within the Union of such persons at adequate wages),

hoped the House would not agree to the deletion of the words in brackets, which the committee had deleted. They had road that certain gentlemen connected with the mining industry had stated that it would be a very good thing if they could create an unemployed class, with a view to reducing wages on the Rand. It would be very unwise to allow the words proposed to be omitted to be cut out. No reason whatever had been given for their deletion.

The amendment to delete the words within brackets was declared carried.

called for a division.

As fewer than ten members (viz., Messrs. Andrews, Boydell, Creswell, Haggar, Sir David Harris, and Messrs. Madeley and H. W. Sampson) voted against the amendment,

declared the amendment affirmed.

On clause 2,

moved the following amendment in clause 2: In subsection (7), lines 15 and 16, to omit “seventy-two hours,” and to substitute “three days.” The mover pointed out that his amendment was to give every facility for an appellant to make an appeal while a ship was in port during holidays, and to enable him to get in touch with the legal authorities without delay.

stated that he was inclined to accept the amendment, as he realised that, under certain circumstances, an appellant might have difficulty in getting his appeal heard.

The amendment was agreed to.

On clause 5,

moved, in clause 5: In sub-section (g), line 44, after “this section,” to insert, “including the wife or the child of a lawful and monogamous marriage duly celebrated according to the rites of any religious faith outside the Union, and duly registered at the place of celebration, and having all the legal consequences of a lawful marriage duly celebrated within the ‘Union.” The mover said that his amendment was connected primarily with a serious case, in which a marriage held under the Mohammedan rites was not recognised by the Supreme Court as a legal marriage. It was pointed out, when the matter came before the House last time, that the Indians wanted polygamous marriages recognised. That was incorrect. They never did demand that, nor were they demanding it now. The hon. member pointed out that he had inserted the word “monogamous” to make this clear. He hoped that the member for Cape Town, Central, would see that he had met the difficulty. As regarded the question of registration, many members would ask: what was the advantage? This was the advantage. Under Cape Law, only properly-arranged Christian marriages are recognised; even marriages under Jewish rites were not recognised unless they were conducted (by Rabbis appointed by the Government to perform them. There was a distinct bar at the present time, except against those performed according to Christian rites, and his motion was to meet that difficulty. Under this amendment, an Indian would only be protected if he went through a marriage which was lawful, monogamous, and which was registered. By this amendment, he thought that they would be able to satisfy their own consciences that they were not discriminating between religious beliefs, and it would go far, he believed, to allay any ill-feeling that existed throughout the Union upon the matter.

said he would like to know from the hon. member, who was fairly in touch with those who stated they had some grievance, whether he was really sure this would meet their grievances? If this would stop threats of passive resistance and remove all grievances and further agitation, he was prepared to accept it on receiving assurances to that effect from hon. members opposite.

said he had received a wire from Mr. Gandhi who was looked upon as a leader of these people, to the effect that they did not demand the recognition of polygamous marriages.

thought the clause extremely dangerous. An Indian might leave his wife here, go off to India, marry another, and bring her back to South Africa with a certificate. Under the clause, they could not keep No. 2 out.

said that if the Minister saw that the clause would satisfy some of these people, then he should accept it. If he found that it would lead to a lot of trouble, then he could withdraw it in another place.

read telegrams he had received, and said he thought that the amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town. Castle, would remove irritation.

moved, in line 43, to omit “described in” and to substitute “exempted by.”

The amendments were agreed to.

In clause 13,

moved, in sub-section (2), page 16, line 1, to omit “so”; in sub-section (4), line 13, after “landed” to insert “and removed from the ship under sub-section (1)”; and in, line 16, to omit “control” and to substitute “custody.”

Agreed to

In clause 19,

moved, in line 62, to omit “seventy-two hours” and to substitute “three days.”

Agreed to.

moved, as an unopposed motion, that the Bill be now read a third time.

Agreed to.

The Bill was accordingly read a third time.

moved: That the House go into Committee of Ways and Means to consider the following resolutions relating to the increase of the rate of excise and customs duties now payable under the laws in force in the several Provinces of the Union: 1. That the rate of excise duty be increased: (a) In the Province of the Cape of Good Hope—(i) on wine brandy, from three shillings per Imperial proof gallon to five shillings per Imperial proof gallon; (ii) on spirits other than wine brandy, from six shillings per Imperial proof gallon to ten shillings per Imperial proof gallon—(b) In every other Province, on spirits other than wine brandy, from nine shillings per Imperial proof gallon to ten shillings per Imperial proof gallon. 2. That the rate of excise duty be increased in the Province of the Cape of Good Hope on extracts or essences of vinegar and acetic and pyroligneous acids, of a strength not exceeding the strength of proof, from seven pence per Imperial gallon or fraction thereof to one shilling per Imperial gallon or fraction thereof, such increase being in addition to any other excise duty payable under any law in respect of those articles. 3. That an excise duty be imposed in the Provinces of Natal, the Transvaal, and the Orange Free State on extracts or essences of vinegar and on acetic and pyroligneous’ acids of one shilling per Imperial gallon or fraction thereof if of a strength not exceeding the strength of proof, and in addition for each degree of strength in excess of the strength of proof, that an excise duty be imposed of fourpence per degree. 4. That the rate of excise duty be increased in the Province of the Cape of Good Hope (a) on beer brewed from worts of the specific gravity of less than 1040 degrees, from four shillings and sixpence per 36 Imperial gallons to six shillings per 36 Imperial gallons; (b) on beer brewed from worts of the specific gravity of 1040 degrees and over, per 36 Imperial gallons of worts of a specific gravity of 1057 degrees (with a proportionate increase or decrease for any difference in gravity) from nine shillings to twelve shillings. 5. That with regard to customs duties in any Province in respect of (a) perfumed spirits, in addition to the customs duty of one-pound two shilling and sixpence per Imperial gallon now payable, a customs duty of ten per cent., ad valorem be imposed; (b) liqueurs, cordials, and mixed spirits, exceeding three per cent., of proof spirits, the customs duty be increased from one pound per Imperial gallon, to one pound two shillings per Imperial gallon, or to twenty-five per cent., ad valorem, whichever duty is the greater; (c) other sorts of spirits, exceeding three per cent. of proof spirits, the customs duty be increased from nineteen shillings per Imperial proof gallon to one pound one shilling per Imperial proof gallon; (d) medicinal and toilet preparations and essences (liquid) and syrups and tinctures, the customs duty be increased from one pound per Imperial gallon to one pound two shillings per Imperial gallon, or to twenty-five per cent., ad valorem, whichever duty is the greater; (e) spirits (other than wine brandy) the produce of any one Province of the Union, on importation into any other Province of the Union, where the customs duty now charged is a less duty than ten shillings per Imperial proof gallon, the customs duty be increased to ten shillings per Imperial proof gallon; (f) extracts and essences of vinegar and acetic and pyroligneous acids of any strength not exceeding the strength of proof—(i) if the same are in bottles or other vessels of a capacity of not more than one Imperial quart, the customs duty be increased from one shilling and one penny per Imperial gallon to one shilling and sevenpence per Imperial gallon; and (ii) if the same are in larger vessels, the customs duty be increased from sevenpence per Imperial gallon to one shilling and one penny per Imperial gallon— and in addition in either case, for each degree of strength in excess of the strength of proof that there be charged a customs duty of five pence per degree. 6. That the said duties of excise and customs hereby increased or imposed shall be subject to the exemptions, allowances and rebates permitted, and to the conditions which may he prescribed, by any law now in force in the Province in which the duty is payable or by any other law relating to excise and customs.

What about the refund concerning which we have all had telegrams?

thanked the hon. member for having reminded him of this, and stated that there was one apparent anomaly created by these proposals which he would like to refer to. Hon. members would see that these new duties came into operation on the 21st of May. Early this session, it would be remembered, Parliament had passed a Bill according to which new excise duties dated from the time when the proposals were brought forward, and under that Act and the Customs Acts these duties were already in operation. Sometimes it was asked that six months’ grace should be allowed, but these duties, he wished to emphasise, were already in operation. Now, however, the following difficulty arose. In the Cape they had the customs duty on imported spirits of 21s., and they had not yet dealt with the excise surtax of 6s. In the Bill before the House, it was proposed to abolish the surtax. In the meantime, however, the unfortunate importer of the Cape would have to pay this higher duty and the surtax as well. It was proposed—he said this for public information, because the proposals seemed to have disturbed many-minds—under the Excise Bill to refund whatever duty had been paid on that surtax since the 21st of May. (Hear, hear.)

said he desired to recognise the very difficult task which the Minister had in putting through here a Bill such as this, because there were financial interests and jealousies which in some manner he would have to try and reconcile at least sufficiently far to make the passage of this Bill fairly easy. (Hear, hear.) The Minister had quoted a little scripture, too little he feared. (Laughter.) He (the Minister) had said “a soft answer turneth away wrath.” He (Mr. Quinn) thought the Minister possessed that extraordinary gift of using a soft answer and making things easy, not only for himself, but also for everyone else. (Hear, hear.) He (the Minister) had got out of many difficulties by using the soft answer. But with that soft answer there often was mixed an Oriental despotism— how the Minister combined the two he (Mr. Quinn) did not know. (Laughter.) Well, in regard to the matter now before the House, he wanted to draw attention to one thing. A little while ago the Minister of Justice, in bringing before the House a certain measure, he (the Minister) had drawn attention to the consumption of dop brandy on the Rand, and had made some remark to the effect that the traffic in that liquor should be made more and more difficult. If this Bill, however, went through, matters would become worse. They all knew that dop brandy had practically been abolished, and they must be very glad of that. It was a great thing to make dop brandy dear and difficult to get. (Hear, hear.) They had hundreds of people on the Rand in gaol as a result of the traffic in this dop brandy. In the proposals before the House, however, there would immediately be created a market for Natal rum. He was no expert as to the merits and demerits of Natal rum, compared with dop brandy, but from what he heard Natal rum was much worse than dop brandy. (Some Natal Members: Oh, no.)

Proceeding, he said there was no doubt about it that under the present proposals there was a danger that it would be sent to the Transvaal in ton loads. There would now be an Excise of 10s. per gallon on rum. He happened to know that already there was a movement in the direction of forming a syndicate or company for the purpose of handling Natal rum to get it on the market in the Transvaal. The cost of Natal rum was 10d. per gallon. The duty on it would be 10s., which made it 10s. 10d. Then Natal rum would enjoy an advantage of 4d. per gallon on the railways, because it was nearer to the Transvaal. Dop brandy would cost something like 3s. 3d. per gallon. The duty would make it 13s. 3d., and by means of the cheap railway rate it would cost 13s. 7d. on the Transvaal market, which was much more than Natal ruin would cost. They were now going to have the market of the Transvaal flooded with Natal rum. It was going to be made more attractive to the illicit liquor dealer, provided he sold it at the same price as he now sold dop brandy, while if he sold it at a lesser price the native would get it cheaper, but so much the worse for the native. (Hear, hear.) He referred to the large quantity of methylated spirits that were made in Natal, and hoped the House would devise some means of making the sale of cheap liquor almost impossible. If they could get at the foundations they would soon kill the illicit liquor trade though they could not stop it altogether, for the natives who had acquired a liking for the accursed stuff would continue to get it. The hon. Minister had said it was his main consideration to keep his revenue somewhere near what it was at present, but to his (Mr. Quinn’s) mind there should be some higher consideration than that. What was the use of making dop brandy impossible if they were going to allow Natal rum to take its place? The wholesale use of liquor on the Rand had cost the country an appalling sum. They could not tell where the expense ended, and it brought ruin, desolation, and disease all over the place. He trusted some means would be found to check such a state of affairs.

said that, so far as the proposals made for uniformity, they represented a step in the right direction; but with regard to the Minister not increasing his revenue on the figures he had before the House, taking into consideration the alterations made by the Financial Relations Bill, the Bill dealing with bewaarplaatsen and the Supplementary Estimates on the one side, and taking credit for the surplus revenue for 1910-11 and so forth, he was going to come out with a deficit of £419,000 for the current year, and he would have been justified in trying to get a little more extra revenue while dealing with the matter of Excise. It would be difficult to see what would be the result with regard to the proposals; but, taking into account imported spirits, there was going to be an increase of about £27,000 on the basis of the present consumption. As to the effect upon the consumption of dop brandy and Natal rum, he thought the effect would be that they were going to put down spirits in the Transvaal cheaper than it was at the present time. Natal rum would be put down in the Transvaal if the Bill went through cheaper than it was at present. Assuming that the cost of Natal rum was 10d., as had been stated by the hon. member for Troyeville, although he was assured by a reliable authority that it cost from 7d. to 8d., but taking the cost as 10d., the Excise was 10s., and the railage was 5d. from Natal to the Transvaal, which brought the total to 11s. 3d. The market price of dop brandy was 3s. 3d. per gallon; there was 10s. on that for Excise, and for railage from the Cape, 9d. per gallon, which brought it up to 14s. So that they were going to get Natal rum 2s. 9d. per gallon cheaper than dop brandy. In other words, they were going to kill dop brandy, for the purpose of introducing Natal rum. Under the proposed measure, his hon. friend was going to put down Natal rum and make a market for spirits, because it was cheaper than at present, and that would be a serious thing. The hon. member next dealt with the Customs duties as referring to imported spirits. Last year brandy worked out at 115 per cent. of the value imported, and whisky, recognised as the principle article, at 183.4 per cent. Last year £229,000 worth was imported into the Union, and duty amounting to £422,000. In fact, taking the whole of the spirits, the duty worked out at 19s. Let them take liqueurs. That worked out at 154½ per cent. Acetic acid worked out at 342 per cent., and essence of vinegar at 134 per cent. He pointed out that he thought that his hon. friend would have had his eye on the revenue—that he would have tried to get as much revenue as possible, because all the world over these articles were recognised as articles upon which taxation should be placed for the purpose of aiding revenue. He thought that he would have fixed his rates not with the idea of kicking out the stuff but rather with the idea of deriving therefrom the maximum revenue for the State. He had not fixed it too low; he had fixed it so high that he would not get the amount of duty that he might have done. Mr. Jagger contrasted the proposed duty of 21s. with the duty in Great Britain and other Dominions, and said that he did not know any country where the duty was so high as it was proposed to be fixed here. The Minister, instead of fixing his eye on the Treasury, had simply taken a protective line and piled up the duty with the idea of keeping the stuff out.

There is less protection under this measure.

said that that might be the case. If the Minister had had an eye on the revenue he would have fixed the rate at about 15s. or 16s., and got the maximum amount of revenue. He was talking from the revenue point of view, and he wanted his hon. friend to get as much as he could out of these articles. It would not stop the importation of foreign spirits, but it would lead to the importation of a lower class of article. In conclusion, he said that the result of the Minister’s proposals would be that spirits would be put down in the Transvaal cheaper than was the case under the present excise.

said there was still too much imported liquor in this country, and yet, in despite of that fact, the Minister was proposing to reduce the duty on it. The local industry had no chance in competition with imported whisky, etc., and the wine-farmers ought to be put in a position to compete. The tax on whisky should be 30s. per gallon. The taste of the public should be diverted in favour of locally-made brandy, as it was better than the imported stuff. The wine-farmers had done their very best to improve the quality of their brandy, and had stored large quantities of it for years. That brandy was stored, however, on the understanding that an excise tax of 6s. would be levied on it. These people were now put in a very difficult position. Another point which he wished to touch upon, and which he thought constituted an injustice, was that grape brandy from the South-West, which was a better and more wholesome product than wine brandy, would now have to pay 10s. per gallon as against 5s. per gallon for wine brandy. He thought that was very unfair. He also strongly objected to the placing of Natal rum in such an advantageous position to the disadvantage of dop brandy from the Cape. He would be unable to vote for the Bill as a whole unless the points which he had touched on were considered and the provisions of the Bill amended to meet them.

said he hoped that the Minister would take heed of the warning that had been given by the hon. member for Troyeville in respect to the Natal rum. Who was going to buy that spirit on the Rand? By whom was it going to be consumed? The white population? No. It would be consumed by the native population. He thought that the figures furnished by the Minister should be given serious consideration by that House. Seventy thousand gallons of dop brandy were consumed in the Cape and 230,000 gallons in other parts of South Africa. And the most of that brandy was consumed by the natives on the Rand?

Why?

said that the Transvaal, in an ill-considered moment, reduced the duty on Cape spirits as compared with imported spirits. From that day the trade of dop brandy in the Transvaal had been on the increase. Referring to the large amount of methylated spirits that went into the Transvaal, he said there was more than a suspicion that a great deal of it was used for the same purpose as dop brandy. He thought that the figures demanded the most careful inquiry on the part of the House. Don’t let them try to plead uniformity, for though it was all very well in other things it would not do in the matter of excise. While the native population of the Rand was exposed to so much temptation it was madness to do anything that would tend to increase the consumption of spirits by the natives. If they were going to help people to supply cheap spirits for the natives, in view of the information they had about the illicit traffic and the outrages upon white-persons, for the sake of a policy of uniformity, they would be acting in a spirit of madness. He hoped the Minister would do no such thing.

said he thought the Minister was to be congratulated upon the step he had taken in the direction of bringing about uniformity in the matter of Excise duties. The Minister had told them that he had given an assurance to the Transvaal people that he would not frame his Excise with a view of getting additional revenue or imposing further taxation. He found that that promise did not apply to the Cape Province. He found that according to the consumption of wine and grape brandy in 1912, the revenue derived from the Cape Province was £155,700. On the basis of his proposed Excise of 5s. on wine brandy and 10s. on grape brandy, assuming that no grape brandy would under the circumstances be consumed in the Cape Province, he found that they would get a revenue on the basis of 5s. a gallon on wine brandy, assuming that the consumption in 1913-14 was the same as in 1912, of £236,000. To this must be added £11,000, probable yield of proposed increase in duty on imported spirit, and a sum of £41,000 deducted, the latter being yield of super-tax on imported spirit in 1912, proposed to be abolished. The balance, £51,000, represented the additional tax to be imposed on the Cape Province. He thought they were all pleased that the Minister had decided to place wine brandy on a better basis than rum or dop. He was sure that the wine brandy producer would have no objection to the proposed increase. He was sure, however, that the Minister had no intention of placing a cheaply produced article like rum on a better basis than grape or dop brandy. What he had really risen for was to express his great regret at, and strong Objection to, the very bad position in which grape brandy was placed by the proposals of the Minister. He thought it was a great mistake under the Cape Excise Amendment Act of 1909 that no discrimination was made as between grape brandy and dop brandy. Hop brandy was a byproduct, just as rum was. It was now proposed to tax grape brandy to the extent of 10s. a gallon, or 5s. more than wine brandy. The hon. member for Fordsburg charged the people of the Cape with sending their dop for consumption on the mines, because the quality was too poor for consumption here. He (Mr. Vintcent) would make a difference between dop and grape brandy, but he would like to tell the hon. member that the reason why dop brandy was sent for consumption to the Transvaal was that the discrimination in favour of wine brandy in the Cape of 3s. per gallon had made the price of wine brandy higher, exclusive of the Excise at the Cape, than grape brandy, and the article which had to bear the heavier Excuse, and in the Cape Province, was sent for consumption there. He hoped the hon. member would withdraw the charge that the Cape consumers were not disposed to consume their brandy here and sent it to the Transvaal for consumption.

Under these proposals the position of grape brandy would be very much worse in the future than it had been in the past. He felt sure that the Minister did not wish to attack vested interests. They had been encouraged to mature grape brandy in the past, but now at one fell swoop the whole of the grape brandy was depreciated to an enormous extent. He hoped that the Minister would agree to allow grape brandy to be sold for another year at, say, 6s. per gallon duty, so as to enable owners to dispose of their stocks.

said he understood they would now have to pay 10s. per gallon on all brandy except on wine brandy. He feared, therefore, that peach brandy would be included in the higher excise. In his opinion the produce of the interior should be protected, so that the money in the country could be kept here.

said that to a great extent he welcomed what had fallen from the hon. members for Troyeville and Cape Town, Central, in having drawn the attention of the House to the great advantage which Natal rum got under these proposals. He gave figures to show that at present prices they would be able to place wine brandy on the Johannes burg market at 10s. 3d. over against rum at 9s. 9d After the expressions which had fallen from the House, he would very much like to move an increased duty on rum, and would certainly do so if it were competent for a private member to do so. He would like to include grape brandy in the preference given to wine brandy, but he recognised that, from an Excise point of view, it would be very difficult to differentiate between grape and dop brandy, for all the latter would he culled grape, and it would be impossible to exercise supervision at every little distillery in the country. He hoped the Minister would not lend his ear to the call to place dop in the same position as wine brandy. With regard to the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, as to the duty on imported spirits, he was not quite able to follow the hon. member. On the total amount of spirits imported last year, we had a reduction in the Cape Province of £24,700. As representing a wine district and a Colonial product, he would like to see the duty on imported spirits increased, because they were a luxury.

What is brandy?

But in the one case we are fostering a Colonial industry, which has grown under protection all along, and we certainly don’t wish an old, well-established industry to be taxed out of existence, simply because we want the imported article to come in at a lower rate. The fine homesteads of Stellenbosch, Paarl, and Wellington have been erected on nothing else but the wine industry. Let us think less of the oversea man and a little bit more of our own people. (Ministerial cheers.) In conclusion, Mr. Heatlie expressed the opinion that there would be an increase of revenue under the proposals; while he thought it would be a step in the right direction to increase the Excise on rum and dop, both of which were byproducts.

said that the hon. members for Troyeville and Cape Town, Central, perhaps without either of them knowing much about the matter they had been discussing, had been doing a very great injury to a Natal industry. Both hon. members had compared dop brandy and good Natal rum—very much to the disadvantage of the latter—but he was not prepared to accept that position at all. Hop was the product of the refuse of the grape—(cries of “No”)—but rum was given as a ration on His Majesty’s ships, and we all knew that the battle of Trafalgar was won by the issue of an allowance of rum. (Laughter.) But what would be the position of the Jack Tar if he were given an allowance of dop instead of rum? (Renewed laughter.) Natal rum, if it were kept for ten years, was as mild and wholesome a drink as any person would care to have—not a headache in a hogshead of it. All that the hon. member for Worcester wanted to do was to satisfy the brandy farmers, but let the Cape people reduce the cost of the manufacture of brandy, and let that compete with Natal rum on a fair basis. The Bill was the usual thing— helping on the Cape and the wine-grower. The increased Excise on beer was meant to encourage the drinking of spirits, and to discourage the consumption of good, wholesome beer. If it were determined to bolster up the products of the grape at the expense of other South African products that did not happen to come from the Cape, do let them leave the Natal people an opportunity of competing in the markets of the world with acetate of lime. He appealed to the Minister, whatever he did, to see that no Excise duty be allowed to interfere with the manufacture of acetate of lime—which was a produce of waste wood in Natal—for export purposes.

said the Minister of Finance rather congratulated himself on the fact that there had been very few objections so far to his proposals, and the Minister gathered from that that people generally were very well satisfied. But the cause of that was that people had not yet had an opportunity of finding out what the proposals really were. It was not only the chemists and druggists that were affected largely, the general public would have to pay more. He hoped the Minister would put off further consideration of the matter, until the people had an opportunity of stating their views.

said there was not the slightest doubt if these proposals were carried out they would give a very severe blow to the wine and brandy industry of the country, because they would give such a stimulus to Natal rum in the Transvaal that the wine and brandy of the Cape would be unable to compete. What they were going to manufacture was a pure wine brandy and the duty on that brandy would be 10s., an increase of 1s. Upon Natal rum, however, the duty proposed was 9s. per gallon, a decrease of 9s. Brandy distilled at the Cape was much superior to Natal rum.

Question.

There was no question about it at all. The hon. member spoke about the use of rum in the Navy, but the Navy would have nothing to do with Natal rum. (Laughter and hear, hear.)

If people only knew the vile stuff that was manufactured as Natal rum they would ask the Minister to prohibit it. If Natal rum was as good as Cape brandy he would have no hesitation in saying give the products of the country a chance. They had already stopped the production of dop— and very rightly too—but they now sought to give a stimulus to Natal rum in the Transvaal. At the present time the people round about the neighbourhood of Worcester and Montagu didn’t know what was being considered, and they ought to have an opportunity of knowing.

said the hon. Minister, in introducing his motion, said that a “soft answer turneth away wrath,” but the day would come when he would have to answer for the statements that he had made. The hon. member read from a telegram received from the licensed victuallers in Johannesburg, asking that the assurance that had been given to them should be carried out. Instead, the soft answer that the Minister spoke about was going to cost these people £200 each per annum. If the surtax had been spread, it would only affect those people infinitesimally. He admitted that he did not know much about the matter, but he thought it was a pity that such an important question should be rushed in this manner. If the Minister would let the recommendations stand over for a few days, he would be doing himself justice and would be giving an opportunity for people who would be affected to express their views.

said everybody welcomed the idea of unifying the excise duties throughout the Union, because it seemed anomalous to have different sets of duties in different Provinces. He hoped that in committee the Minister would give ample time for the full consideration of the proposals before the House. Although they had made it much more difficult to produce dop brandy, nevertheless they had reduced the duty by 9s. per gallon on Natal rum, a liquor which was much more deleterious. So long as people drank strong drink it should be the policy of the legislature to see that drink was pure and as little deleterious as possible. It was in that view that his hon. friend agreed to the amendment defining wine brandy, and that definition was in producing an unrectified spirit, which, after maturity, would be of great value and perhaps obtain a world wide reputation. The Bill which his hon. friend the Minister of Justice introduced laid down a practically perfect definition as far as wine brandy was concerned, but his hon. friend, he was afraid, instead of defining wine brandy in that way, was defining it in an entirely different direction.

The hon. member hoped the definition of wine brandy would be looked into. There should be a difference in duty between real wine brandy and brandy which was made from the husks and the juice of the grape. By a differentiation of that sort they would encourage the building of a product which might eventually supply the wants not only of this country, but of other countries also. While he objected to the flooding of the Transvaal with dop brandy or Natal rum, he thought the wine farmers should be prepared to face the position and would not get a reduced duty by a definition which could not be fully understood as anything save pure wine brandy. People would drink, and so long as they did so it was the duty of the House to see that they drank the best possible article. Referring to the speech of the hon. member for Cape Town, Central, he said it was the only afternoon on which he had heard the hon. member illogical. He (Mr. Jagger) had commenced his speech with levelling a charge at the Minister of Finance for not introducing a Bill which increased the duty all round, and then said that one of his great objections was that he had not reduced the duty on imported spirits. (Laughter.) Where they had a legitimate industry in the country opposed to an imported article, they should be prepared to protect it in a reasonable manner. If they were going to allow imported whisky, for which unfortunately a sale was developing in this country, to be placed on exactly the same rate of duty as the excise levied on their own product, they were going to wipe out their industry altogether. The result would be that even the commercial classes would lose considerably.

said he understood from hon. members that the effect of the Bill was going to encourage the traffic in one form of deleterious liquor in the Transvaal, and to discourage it in another form. There was, undoubtedly, room for complaint with regard to the illicit liquor trade in the Transvaal, and if the Government found that they could stop it in one form, they should seriously consider taking steps to stop it in the other form also. They had done something with regard to the stopping of the illicit traffic in gold by striking at the heart of the matter, and if the Government did not stop the deleterious liquor traffic, the responsibility would rest with them.

said that the main body of the proposals had been so well received that it was unnecessary for him to say much more about them. Some small matters which, however, were of importance in comparison with the whole body of the proposals before the House had been raised. It had not been possible to give a long time for hon. members to consider the matter, but they would have some little time before the proposals went before the committee. He thought it would be time enough if the proposals came before the committee on Friday, and’ in the meantime the various suggestions would be considered. The definition of wine brandy, which had been mentioned by the hon. member for Fort Beaufort, would be gone into fully, and he thanked the hon. member for the suggestion. The same remark applied also in reference to the matter of rum, which had been raised. He had been considerably impressed by some of the facts and figures brought forward with regard to rum, but nothing was further from his ideas than to open up a market for rum. Of course, the trade referred to was an illicit traffic, but if they could stop it in other ways than by prohibition in the Transvaal liquor laws, they would do so. He would go fully into that before going into committee. The hon. member for Umlazi suggested there was some chance of an industry being started in Natal for the manufacture of acetic acid for exportation purposes. There would not be the slightest trouble about that. Acetic acid for exportation purposes would not be handicapped in the least, but the dilution of acetic acid for potable purposes would be another thing. Although rum might not be useful as a drink, it might be useful as a motor spirit. If they could manufacture rum for the purpose of a motor spirit, then, of course, it would be a different thing, and all duty would be remitted in such a case when rendered unpotable.

The motion for the House to go into Committee of Ways and Means was adopted. Friday next being the day fixed.

Business was suspended at 6 p.m.

resumed the adjourned debate on the motion for the second reading of the Railways Construction Bill. He said that on the last occasion he was drawing a comparison between the railway estimates of last year and those now laid before the House.. The Minister of Railways seemed to have exercised some sort of hypnotic influence over the Railway Board, and the Board seemed to agree to anything that he asked. He drew attention to the lateness of the introduction of the Bill, and said that last year a promise was given that the Railway Bill would be laid upon the Table at an early part of the session and in the Governor-General’s speech it was similarly stated that they would shortly have the railways construction proposals before them. It was only late in the session that the proposals were laid on the Table of the House. Then the public had rights. The public ought to have new railway lines before them for a considerable time, in order that constituents might communicate with their members. It was proposed to spend this year £2,761,631, excluding rolling stock, and he asked the House whether it could judge of the proposals placed before it on the meagre information that had been supplied When they were expected to vote large sums like this, they should not only have the recommendations of the Board before them, but the result of investigations as to the populations along the routes of railway, the trade expected to be done, and the future prospects of these railway lines. He thought he had every reason to say that very meagre information had been supplied. The loss on these lines had been calculated at the rate of £105,478 per annum, but surely it was too sanguine to estimate at the rate of 3½ per cent. He thought it better to reckon the loss at 4½ per cent., at which rate the loss would be £136,650 in the first year. The question of the future of the lines would depend on the point as to when the trade would increase. £500 per mile had been allowed for rolling stock, and the Minister had said that he had eliminated that amount from the calculations, but he (the speaker) thought that some provision should be made for extra rolling stock. In regard to the details of the Bill before the House, the speaker remarked that in the new lines there was a vote authorising an amount of £3,421,000. He saw the calculation as to what the Government thought they would be able to spend was £1,650,000. If they carried out the whole programme there still remained a large sum unexpended under the vote they had already authorised. He did not know what to make of these proposals to build new lines, except that they were absolutely committing themselves to something in the far future. He saw that they had a balance of £3,119,000, and during the current year it was proposed to spend £1,800,000, so that on that vote also there was £1,300,000 in excess of what they could spend upon the already authorised amount. The same applied to the amount asked for rolling stock. They had a vote of £921.000 authorised, and in this respect it was very instructive to note that during the past year they only spent £87,000 in rolling stock. Well it was further proposed to spend £730,000 during the current year, and that, together with what was spent in 1912, would not exhaust the authorised vote. Here again they were asked to spend £650,000, of which there seemed no chance at all during the present financial year. He quoted these figures in the hope that the Minister in his, reply would give the House some specific figures and reasons for asking them to vote a further three millions of money, which on his own statement he could not possibly spend during the present year. It was simply a sort of specious form of window dressing to satisfy the demands of some quarters without the least probability of any of them being satisfied in practice. Then there was another very important estimate in this matter which he thought would give the Minister of Finance food for thought, and that was how he was going to finance these large sums of money. First of all, he (Sir Lionel) thought it would be very difficult because there were so many other things for which they had to borrow money, and then in the second place, why should they pass votes, knowing that the pace upon which they could build must be set by available resources. (Hear, hear.) It was undoubtedly upon that basis that the Government had made its calculations as to what could be done during the present financial year. The Minister had told them that there was not enough cake to go round. Therefore it would be better to take a far less ambitious programme this year. It was not a very favourable time just now to borrow money. A war had just been gone through in Europe, and in the circumstances it would probably be found that they would not be able to build any of these lines this year. Altogether it seemed to him that the proposal now before the House did not savour of good finance. He thought attention should be drawn to the way in which the Exchequer balances had steadily gone down year after year. In 1910 the Exchequer balances were over £4,40ffi000, in the following year they were £2,000,000, the year after that they were £2,700,000, and the present year was begun with an Exchequer balance all told of £377,931. The credit of the country was perfectly good, but what they had to consider was when it was advisable to go into the market for large sums of money. Last year a proposal was brought before the House to build a line of railway in the north-west of this Province at a cost of £1,133,000. That had now been cut down to £635,000. What he would like to know was what would have been the position if that line had been carried last year?

It was impossible on the information before the House to criticise the lines in detail. While he believed from the inquiries he had made that the line in the north-west of the Cape Province was a good one, he was not sure that it was necessarily the best that could be constructed. The member for Standerton had criticised the line which the Board proposed to build between Bethal and Wakkerstroom. The Railway Board last year recommended that they should build another line to Zandspruit, although they drew attention to the fact that it would be better in some respects that a line should be built from Standerton to Ermelo. He was not satisfied with the information placed before them by the Board, that that would not have been the better line, from many points of view, than the one now proposed. What they had to consider was where they could best spend the limited resources at their disposal. It was doubtful, to his mind, whether their Railway Board, as at present constituted, under the hypnotic influence of his hon. friend the Minister, was the best means of getting this result. In regard to the nine miles of line from Hlobane, it seemed to him that a most doubtful principle was being introduced, and that, to take the power to build this line, would prejudice the position of the company, as he would absolutely over-ride the Act of Parliament passed in Natal in 1906.

I am making an agreement with the company.

Does the Minister intend to withdraw this?

I hope it will not be necessary.

said that, in regard to the proposed line to the Rand Agricultural Show ground, he hoped the Minister did not intend to run that line in competition with the tramways. There was no particular objection to that line, but he thought the feelings of the Municipality would be a little bit hurt if they went on in this fashion. At one time it was suggested to have a line through the middle of the town to the show ground, which would have been to the detriment of the tramway system. The line was a very useful one to bring passengers from outside into the show ground, but he hoped, whatever was done, the Minister did not propose running it in competition with the tramway. The Transvaal was to have a certain amount of railway construction, but there, again, he was inclined to question whether it was in the interests of the best parts of the country. He did not think Johannesburg had been particularly well treated by the railways. The railway line crossed the town at present in various places, at very great inconvenience to the traffic. He did not think the Municipality should be expected to contribute to the cost of lowering lines or constructing viaducts, in order to get over this difficulty. The Bill contained a very involved clause in regard to the expropriation of land for the purposes of railway construction, which certainly he did not understand. To his mind, the railway ought to pay for improvements; but the mere acquisition of land for the purpose of carrying a railway line ought not to be paid for, in face of the fact that the value of the land must be enormously enhanced by the building of the line.

He was glad to see that the Minister was taking over the lines built on local guarantee, because no more pernicious system could be introduced. The Sea Point line was taken up purely as a competitive line with the tramway system. That was a most undesirable system. If they started a railway line in competition with the tramways, and competed below cost, it was a most unfair proceeding. As an instance of the unstable policy in regard to railways, he might mention the Messina line, which was an example of the most extraordinary vacillation in railway policy. The first agreement was made in regard to the building of this line on April 2, 1910.. In that agreement the Messina Company was to form a railway company, which was to find £750,000 to build that line, and the Government was to make good a certain amount of interest. Then they found another agreement was entered into on April 13, 1911, by which the position was rather reversed.

I must ask the hon. member whether the Messina line is in this Bill?

The Messina line in particular is not in this Bill, but, with all respect, it is a means of showing the vacillating policy of the Board.

This is a Railway Bill dealing with certain specific lines, and I do not see that the Messina line is really in it.

It is perfectly true that the Messina line is not mentioned, but the connection with it, to form part of the line, is part of the authorised construction. Proceeding, he said he did not mention this so much for the purpose of dealing with the Messina line as that he desired to show the extraordinary vacillation of the Board and discredit the reports that came before the House. He was endeavouring to ask the Minister what had become of that line

It is going on merrily.

Under what agreement is it going on?

The old agreement.

said that he held in his hand a volume of the Select Committee which corroborated everything he had said. He would like to read one or two paragraphs. Speaking of the Bill, one of the members of the Board (Sir Thomas Price) said that when the Bill came before the Minister in his capacity as a member of the Cabinet the whole of the recommendations were not adopted and the only time they saw they were not adopted was when the draft Bill was printed.

said he must point out that the Railway Board was not concerned in this Bill except with relation to special lines of railways.

But surely we have to base our judgment upon the report of the Railway Board? (Hear, hear.)

The hon. member will have plenty of opportunities of dealing with the Railway Board on the Estimates. (Ministerial cheers.)

pointed out that the hon. member for Yeoville was trying to make it clear that the information before them was not sufficient. The hon. member was pointing out that the reports of the Board were being departed from. He (Sir Thomas) wanted to know whether it was not within the province of a member of the House, the report being of such a wide character—

pointed out that the hon. member must understand that it was quite out of order to go into a question of the Messina railway or to deal with any reports of the Railway Board. If any member had not an opportunity of dealing with the Railway Board at all he would not be so chary, but this was a specific Railway Bill, for which the Minister was responsible.

said that all he could say was that so far from the report being the report of the Railway Board, it was the report of the Minister of Railways. The Railway Board was merely the automaton It would be much better if he had been able to read from the report, but hon. members could do that for themselves.

pointed out that the arguments might be quite good if made under different circumstances. The Minister of Railways was responsible for this Bill, not the Railway Board. (Ministerial cheers.)

said he felt so strongly about the matter that if he did not know a docile majority would follow the Minister, he would have moved a rider. The information before them was inadequate, and they had no data upon which they could judge whether these particular lines were better than others It was a mistake when new lines of railway were being constructed in this way, not to make provision for closer settlement. When they required the land after the line was built they would have to pay through the nose for it. (Hear, hear.) He would not venture to say that these lines were not desirable, but he was not at all satisfied that they were the best lines. He did not think that proposals of this magnitude should be hurried through the House at this late hour of the session, and the Government should he condemned for legislating in this way (Opposition cheers.)

wanted to say a few words upon these railways, because the people he represented were extremely interested in the Bill before the House. He did not think that the amount spent upon the railways was excessive. When they considered the vast amount of money spent upon bricks and mortar—in embroideries, in fact—the amount spent in opening up the land by railway communication was comparatively small.

The best way they could spend money was opening up communication in the country. He thought it was a most unfortunate thing that they had adopted, apparently in their railway policy, the old, bad Provincial system. He saw from the newspapers, so much in Natal, so, much in the Transvaal, so much in the Free State, and so much in the Cape—(hear, hear)—as if it was not all one country, as if what benefited he one Province did not benefit the other. It was all one country now. Referring to the Kalahari desert, he said that not one single step had been taken, nor apparently was it contemplated, in the direction of opening up that district. Where would America be if they had followed that (the South African) policy? First, they had in that country the railway, and then the settlers followed the railway; and although they did not have a fairy land here, they had some of the finest grazing land, and land as valuable as in the Kroonstad district, which had been despised in the days when he was in the Free State, and in those days one could buy a farm in the Kroonstad district for £10. What he wanted to draw attention to was that, in his opinion, he did not think there was enough information before them. (Hear, hear.) When the Railway Board was asked to report upon a line, scampering along the main road in a motor car was not the way to get that information —(hear, hear)—and when the Board differed from the people who had been over the ground and were acquainted with the ground, he thought that they wanted something more than a motor car to impress it upon them. And if they made a mistake in constructing a line, it was not like a thing one could correct at a moment’s notice. It was not like a magistrate one could remove next year. If they constructed a wrong line, they might regret it very much. Proceeding, he referred to the line which it was proposed to construct in the North-western Districts, and said that it was not the line which had been agreed upon at the Conference, when people interested in rival lines had agreed upon the line to the North-west. These people had recommended that the line should start from a little beyond Victoria West, Amsterdam, and go to the village of Loxton, and then go down the Zak River to Williston. That line, if they adopted it, would be four miles shorter in communication than the line which was to be adopted now, but they would make about 60 miles more railway. His hon. friend the Minister said that, rather than go to the expense of 60 miles of light railways, they would make the railway where they could expect little or no traffic, rather than over a country which was capable of more development. He had no hesitation in saying that the engineer (Mr. Macpherson) thought that the railway should go this way for the purpose of developing the country. Mr. Kanthack was strongly in favour of the railway going that way, because he said there were capabilities there. They were now running the railway to the possessions of a company which had done a great deal of good to South Africa, but they were omitting the top of the river, where the water came past. His constituents at Loxton had just completed a dam for which they had borrowed £4,500—a very creditable enterprise for a young community. There were dams being built all down that river. People from Oudtshoorn had gone to the Zak River, had purchased land and developed it, and had now started the ostrich industry oh the upper reaches of the Zak River. His hon. friend knew that a most valuable part of that district was on the slopes of the Nieuwveld Mountains. It was the best part of the whole district; therefore, apart from the crux which he had mentioned that it was costing more money, there could be no possible doubt that that was the correct line to go. (Hear, hear.) He wanted to point out to his hon. friends on the cross benches that these “bloated landowners,” for whose benefit they were asked to build that railway, had gone to the wilderness, and made it habitable, long ago. A benevolent Government had then stepped in, imposed a rack rent on them, allowed them to capitalise the land, and had charged them an additional charge for the capitalisation. No Irish landlord had acted towards his tenants in a worse way than the Government of that country had acted towards these people. It had been in the “brave old days,” when they had screwed as much out of these people as they could. These people, not contented with paying for the land at rack rent prices to pay and over and above that had to pay perpetual land taxes of 2½d. in the pound, in the shape of quit rent on sale price, and additional Council rates as well. So, if they talked of land taxes, these people had been paying land taxes for years and years. Proceeding, he said that they had taken out of the district of Fraserburg alone £210,000, putting it into the Treasury and spending it in happier places. They had not spent it there, and it was only last year that they had even begun to get some buildings there. They had put it into, say, the Table Bay Harbour Works, or into other railways. Was it not just that these people should have some sort of claim? It was not a favour, but justice. If they constructed a railway as proposed they were going to put these people off for years from the railway. Although there was more money to be spent, these people were entitled to it. He would not be doing justice to these people if he did not speak as strongly as he could of the injustice of altering the route of that line. He knew he could not move an increase of that thing, and he was in the hands of the Government. He would hail it with joy if the Minister of Finance could move it, otherwise he must move an amendment to that Bill, painful as it was to him, and try to get as much support as he could for the amendment; for he felt that if they constructed the line as was proposed they were making a mistake, and it was a mistake which could not be corrected. They were practically throwing away money, leaving a productive part of the country, and going over a wilderness. That, he thought, was always a mistake, and it was penny wise and pound foolish. They could get crops on the top of the Zak river when the flood did not come down lower. In conclusion, he said he had not made that plea for the purpose of causing the expenditure of money, but he was anxious to see that they should avoid mistakes in making these railways, and he felt that the route selected was a distinct mistake.

rose next to explain his reasons for deciding to vote against the Bill. He wished at the outset to plead ignorance of the various merits and necessities of the projects, and that was his principal reason for his opposition to the Bill. Speaking generally, the information placed at the disposal of hon. members was very meagre that those who did not happen to represent constituencies through which one of those railway lines had to go were without the information they should have to protect the interests of the ratepayers’ whom they represented against money being inadvisably spent. The hon. member went on to refer to article 130 of the Act of Union, and urged while the letter of that article might have been complied with it had not been complied with in the spirit in which they all read that Act of Union before they went into Union. They believed that the article was framed for the express purpose of placing outside the arena of political patronage and beyond the means of political corruption—he was not accusing the hon. Minister, but they had to safeguard themselves—-that matter of building new railways. Such matters should be outside the field of those things which could be used by a Ministry inclined thereby as the means of political corruption. The only way to properly interpret that article if it was of any use to the country, was that the Railway Board should regard the extension of railways in this country entirely apart from any political influences of any sort. Proceeding, he said that the North-west of the Cape Colony was eminently in need of railway extension, so the hon. member for Victoria West had told them, and he had no doubt but that was correct, but many hon. members other than himself were without knowledge of the necessities there, or for extensions in other parts of the country. With the kind of railway report they had before them, they were quite unable to say in what spirit those proposals had been considered. They did not know whether the Railway Board had had the whole field to choose from, or whether the Government had submitted those particular projects only for report. If so, then they were no further under the protection of Article 130 of the Act of Union than if that Article had ever existed. They were told in those reports that nearly all those lines would be worked at a loss. They were prepared for that, but they were without the information they required as to whether any one of those lines, say, Carnarvon, Calvinia, or some other line, was one which was more likely to open up a district and be profitable quicker than any other line. He objected to that on the grounds of principle; it left the extension of railways in this country as a very important piece of political patronage, and did not remove railway extension out of the range of being made the instrument of some political jobbery. On that ground he would vote against the Railway Bill, as against others, until the promise given to the House had been carried out, to see that the Railway Board was a Board that stood as a protection between the House and the Executive Government.

There were one or two matters to which, he would like to call attention. One line, although far removed from his constituency, was one in which he had taken a great deal of interest. A visit to that country had left him with the impression that it was a part of the Union with great potential mineral resources—he referred to Namaqualand. He was convinced that lack of mining enterprise in that direction was due, as much as anything, to the fact that the only railway communication with the coast was left in the hands of a private company. He would have liked the Railway Board to have considered the possibility of acquiring that line, or building an alternative line. So long as they had there the neck of the bottle in the hands of private enterprise, there would not be much development. He was sorry not to see in the report of the Railway Board a matter which, he thought, was of more importance than some of the lines—an alternative Natal line. There was no part of the railway building within the Union which was of more importance than the construction of a line, with reasonable gradients, to substitute that extremely switchback railway which connected Durban with Johannesburg. Proceeding, he said that there was no provision in the Estimates for rolling-stock, which in almost every railway was included. In his opinion, it was a very dangerous piece of estimating, and a serious departure in finance. Every 100 miles of railway they built had to be equipped with rolling-stock. It did not matter whether they took old rolling-stock from other lines. It was not proper accounting to leave out rolling-stock, for it was really only fooling themselves that the expenditure was going to be less. He thought that, before they were asked to pass another Railway Bill, there should be a discussion in the House with regard to the position of the Railway Board.

said that he did not intend to take the time of the House by criticising the lines proposed as that had already been done. His object was to tell the House how bitterly disappointed he and his constituents felt that no extensions of railways in East Griqualand were in this year’s programme, not even the paltry twenty odd miles between Franklin and Kokstad. He would try to give good reasons why they should be built. The line from Natal to Kokstad was agreed to years ago, and the only excuse the Cape Government ever made for not carrying out its agreement was lack of funds. In proof of this statement he read a telegram from the present Minister of Justice to the Mayor of. Kokstad, dated August 11, 1903, which read: “Railway Committee approved your line Kokstad to Riverside.” The late Sir Gordon Sprigg also promised a deputation from Kokstad that the line would be built. Coming to more recent times, he said that last session he was one of a deputation, headed by the member for East London, which interviewed the Prime Minister and the then Minister of Railways, when they urged the necessity of extending the railway from Idutywa to Umtata on the one side, and from Franklin to Kokstad on the other. This they were told was impossible last year, but they all understood that both extensions would be on the paper this year. His complaint was that the line from Idutywa to Umtata was to be built, and the other one was not. He did not object to the Umtata extension, as it was very necessary, owing to the East Coast fever restrictions, but the people in East Griqualand had been suffering from the very same restrictions for the last three years, and he maintained if railway facilities, were necessary for the trade of Umtata and East London they were just as necessary for the trade of the white districts of Mount Currie and Matatiele with Natal. Other very good reasons why the line should be built from Franklin to Kokstad, and from Franklin to Matatiele, were that they would go through well watered country eminently suitable for closer settlement and capable of producing all kinds of grain in enormous quantities, as well as cattle sheep, horses. The lines would pay from the very beginning. At the present time he was informed that the lines from Riverside to Franklin was paying better than any other branch line in the Cape Province. This was borne out by the returns for November, December, and January last, which were supplied to him in answer to a question in the House. He went on to quote these figures, and read a couple of wires received from an agent at Franklin, showing that 350 cattle for Natal were waiting for trucks, and great difficulty was experienced in getting them away. The number of grazing cattle were deteriorating, and also 500 hamels. He did not blame the railway authorities too much, as it was not always possible to provide large numbers of trucks at a moment’s notice, but what he did say was that the railway terminus in the country ought, if possible, to be in townships like Kokstad and Matatiele, with large commonages where transport cattle, waiting for loads, and stock to be sent off by rail, could graze free of charge. Proceeding, he gave a few statistics from the last census proving that Mount Currie and Matatiele were rich districts well worthy of railway facilities, and that extensions in either area would pay at once. Another point he would like to bring to. the notice of the House was the large revenue derived from posts and telegraphs, a large portion of which was at present paid to postcarts, and this could be saved by the railway. In conclusion, he pointed out that Kokstad was the largest town in the Union which had no railway connection. He left the matter in the hands of the House and the Minister of Railways in the hope that even now the Kokstad extension might be put in this year’s Bill, but if that was impossible that they would get some assurance that both the Franklin —Kokstad and the Franklin—Matatiele extensions would be on next year’s programme.

said he had a grievance against the Minister and the Railway Board in connection with the proposed line from Bethal to Volksrust. The Board were not acting in the true interests of the country. A line was now proposed from Bethal to Volksrust, whilst last year a line from Wakkerstroom to Zandspruit was recommended. Two years ago nobody even thought of a line from Bethal to Amersfoort, and nobody had asked for one.

But a line from Bethal to Standerton had been asked for, or one to some other point on the, line to Natal between Standerton and Johannesburg. In order to show to the Minister the usefulness of a line from Ermelo to Standerton, neither trouble nor cost had been spared. Influential deputations had been sent to the Minister and also to the Board, and all that trouble had now been taken in vain. No notice whatever was taken of the wishes of the public. The public would have to pay for the railways, and was it not fair, therefore, that to their opinion some attention should be paid? The report of the Railway Board contained nothing, and did not suggest a single reason why the Wakkerstroom line was recommended in place of a line from Ermelo to Standerton. The Board merely stated that in their opinion the line recommended would work well, but no reason for that opinion was given. Neither the Minister nor the Board had instituted an inquiry. They did not know along what properties the line would go or what land the line would serve. Not a single member of the Board had been there, because there was no main road, and consequently no way for a motor-car to go. The Board usually fled along the roads in a motor-car, and then drew up their report and handed it in. In such a report it was merely said: This line, and not that line. The members of the Board relied for the most part on the reports of the engineers, who, however, knew very little about agriculture. Last year they had the reports of two engineers, and whilst the one said that the country through which the line would run was capable of agricultural development, the chief engineer agreed with it, but added that the district was thinly populated. They had now been urging the construction of a line from Ermelo to Standerton for the past three years, as it would go through a thickly-populated district, where every inch of ground was fruitful and could be worked. The line to Wakkerstroom would go through a district, from Amersfoort to Volksrust, which was only suitable for cattle breeding; and notwithstanding all those facts, the Board had recommended the Wakkerstroom line. There was no doubt that Wakkerstroom needed railway communication, but they were taking the line a long way round to get there. He felt convinced that within a year Wakkerstroom would be dissatisfied with its railway. Ermelo, too, had been connected with the railway net in a most unfair way owing to the roundabout course taken, and they were very dissatisfied with it. It was wrong to build such a line, seeing that it was neither in the interests of trade nor transport. Some 159 landowners at Bethal had declared last year in the form of a petition that the line Bethal to Amersfoort was not in their interest.

In its report the Board had only made a single reference to the Ermelo-Standerton line, and that was in connection with the Ermelo coal fields. That was an important factor for the Ermelo-Standerton line, hut by no means the most important. They had pointed out to the Minister last year many advantages in favour of the Ermelo-Standerton connection, but those had apparently been forgotten. So far as Bethal was concerned, nobody there had asked for a line to Wakkerstroom—not a single inhabitant. The hon. member for Wakkerstroom had quoted that fact, however, as proof that such a line was necessary. To the ordinary man such a statement as that was inexplicable.

Reference was made in the Bill to the expropriation of a railway track 100 feet in width. That was too wide. The ground increased in value, but neither the farmer nor the Administration would obtain any advantage by reason of that increase in value. They might safely agree to make it narrower, and he hoped the Minister would give his attention to that point.

The hon. member for Middelburg had expressed his approval of the Wakkerstroom line, and had scolded the hon. member for Standerton as a quasi-commandant when the latter had commended the Ermelo-Standerton proposal as being of service in connection with the defence of the country. If the hon. member for Middelburg had ever been, a quasi-commandant, then he would know that in other countries lines were built exclusively for the purposes of defence.

said he would not have risen to address the House if the hon. Minister had not referred to him specially. He was strongly in favour of building railways in all parts of: the country, in fact, he had frequently gone with deputations to induce the Minister to build railways, but he was anxious that the lines to be built were in the best interests of the country.

They did not have sufficient information as to whether these lines were the best or not, and the information from the Railway Board was so inadequate that they did not know whether these lines were the best in the interests of the country or not. He wanted to know whether the members of the Board were unanimous, whether they had disagreed, whether some of these lines had been agreed to by the casting vote of the chairman, or whether alternative lines had been considered? He could not look upon the proposed lines as business propositions. He alluded to the South Africa Act and to the lines having to be carried on business principles, as well as to the procedure to be adopted with regard to non-paying lines. If they were only going to develop the country by building lines so far as they could do so out of the paying lines there must, he said, soon be a stop to the extension of railways in that country, unless they paid increased rates. And upon whom did these increased rates fall? Upon the man who lived inland. The report of the Railway Board, as placed at their disposal, showed that out of these lines which were going to be built, not one of them was going to pay working expenses. The total revenue for the first year was to be £131,000, and the loss £103,000. He contended that if they went on building new branch lines at that rate, the revenue of the railways would not stand the loss, and when they came to that point, were they going to stop railway extension or adopt some other system? He contended that it was not fair to the people who lived inland, who got their goods over the railway, that they should bear the loss on these branch lines. It was ultimately the coast ports that would receive the benefit of the branch lines that they were now building. It would be a much fairer thing if people from all parts contributed towards the development of the country, and not only the people who lived inland. He was in favour of extending the railways, but it must be on a fair basis. The Minister had referred to a matter which had been brought very forcibly to his attention recently, the excessive price for expropriation. He was wondering if it would not be to the advantage of the country if the Government should obtain land, where they proposed building railway lines, at the ordinary price of the land.

Suppose you don’t vote for the line?

said that in the North-west they were going to have a railway over a most barren part of the country going to a fruitful spot. The land there had been purchased very cheaply, because there had been no railway communication, but now, as a result of the construction of the line, that land had become very valuable. He had recently seen land that had increased tremendously in value, owing to the action of the Government, entirely in the interest of private individuals, and he considered that some steps should be taken so that the Government could procure land for closer settlement and open up the country for the poor whites and others who would be prepared to go on that land. It would be well if those things could be borne in mind in connection with each other. With regard to the question of rolling stock mentioned by the hon. member for Jeppe, it appeared that they were not including anything for rolling stock in that Bill. They would take the rolling stock from main lines and use it on the branch lines. That, he agreed, was good business, but the branch lines ought to be charged the cost of their rolling stock. The old rolling stock would have to be replaced by new at a great expense. He did not know whether the hon. Minister was going to take that out of profit, or debit those lines with the cost, but, in his opinion, the branch lines should be charged with the rolling stock with which they were equipped. If they were to be supplied with rolling stock free, how were they going to estimate whether they paid or not? He could not understand how the Railway Board could consent to the rolling stock of the new lines not being included—

They did not consent.

Well, there they had the whole point. The Railway Board, it appeared, did not manage those things. It was done by the recommendation of the Government or the Minister of Railways and Harbours. As he read through clause 130 of the Act of Union, he was under the impression that those things were going to be carried out on business lines. They would, however, have an opportunity of going into the matter at a later stage.

referred to the request which had been made by the Minister in his speech, wherein he had asked hon. members to deal with the Bill in the spirit in which the Railway Board had drafted it, and the Minister was certainly very satisfied and cheerful.

The speaker expressed his regret that he could not share in that spirit of cheerfulness or satisfaction in connection with the proposed line from Carnarvon via Williston to Twee Riviers. Many of his constituents were very dissatisfied with the bend which the proposed line was to take, and he was bound to share in that feeling. He hoped they would not take it amiss if he spoke in a seemingly parochial spirit, as he felt that the route which was proposed was not in the true interests of the country.

From Carnarvon to Williston the line went through a barren district of about 90 miles in extent, which might be described as a desert. The rainfall in that district was a very limited one, and during some years it rained exceedingly little. The farmers who made a living there with cattle breeding occasionally had to trek owing to the absence of water. There was very little prospect for agriculture there, and even dry-farming would have no chance. The farms there were of great size. Even for the locomotives it would sometimes be found difficult to provide them with water.

The Minister had laid down the principle that lines should be constructed as far as possible in districts where there was a chance of developing them, and where there was a chance of paying their way. The sneaker quite agreed with what had been stated by the right hon. member for Victoria West, who had strongly urged his disapproval of carrying their lines through dry districts which could not be developed.

The hon. member for Cape Town, Central, had stated the whole truth when he had pleaded for the construction of lines through districts rich in water, where there were possibilities of irrigation, and had quoted the upper reaches of the Zak River. The two hon. members had proposed a line via Victoria West and Loxton, and although the speaker agreed that that would be a better line than the one proposed, he felt convinced that a better route would be found in that via Krom Rivier, Nieuweveld, near Fraserburg, along the slopes of the mountains, past the watershed of the rivers, and always near the Zak River and other rivers, till they came to the very fruitful district of Twee Riviers. The speaker described in detail the great fruitfulness of those districts and their possibilities of development along every mile of the route. He referred also to the heavy rainfall, and to the considerable amount of agriculture which was already in existence. Such a line as that would very soon pay itself. He spoke highly of the canals along the Breede Rivier which he had seen on his visit to Robertson, and he saw in the future big canals along the Zak Rivier from its source downwards. But in the first place, he urged, a railway there would be necessary, otherwise the development of the district would be long delayed. He expressed his dissatisfaction at the fact that neither the Minister nor the Railway Board had paid a visit to those districts, although they had been invited to do so, and had gone along the other proposed line in their motors. He was further surprised that the report of the flying survey had not been made known.

Nine members of Parliament had visited the Nieuweveld, and he could not speak highly enough of what they had so much admired there, and of the fruitfulness of the surrounding country. They were all agreed that it was a necessity for the people there to have help by means of transport, the more especially as the roads were in a most miserable condition.

In the Transvaal practically every little village had its railway connection, such places, for example, as Utrecht, Lydenburg, and other very small towns; whilst here there were villages, old and important, and well worthy of consideration in view of the heavy taxation which they had paid in the past, which still had to do without a railway. He referred to such places as Fraserburg and Prince Albert.

The line via Krom River would unfortunately cost more than one through Carnarvon, and the speaker would be out of order if he moved an amendment in that connection. However, he still hoped that a change of route would be made in favour of Twee Riviers.

said that when they were spending money it was their duty to see that they got value for it. He was accordingly disappointed that the South-Western districts were not to be helped. It was true they had a line there, but it was of little use for the farmers, as the tariffs were too high—so Hugh, indeed, that it paid better to send the produce to De Aar.

pointed out that the N.C.C.R. was not in the Bill.

continued by pointing out that George was one of the poorest districts owing to lack of proper railway communication. There were lines contained in the Bill for which it was impossible for him to vote. The line from De la Rey to Pudimoe would go through a wilderness, and it was wrong to pay £268,000 for such a railway. There were many farms in the Cape Province which had no railway connection. Calitzdorp had no line, although every inch of the ground there was cultivable ground. They wanted to build a dam there which would require 60,000 barrels of cement, but the transport of that cement from Oudtshoorn to Calitzdorp would cost 6s. per barrel.

That dam could be built for £10,000 less money if they had a railway. The Minister ought first to help those districts which were the most thickly populated. But he saw they had plans for building lines in the west of the Transvaal, whilst the Board admitted in its report that the districts in question were dry and thinly populated. Was it fair, he asked, to build lines such as that, and at the same time to refuse to construct one in a thickly-populated district? He would have to vote against the Schweizer-Renecke line. There were many thickly-populated districts in the Cape which were entirely without railway connection, and the hoped the House would endorse his protest against the proposed Schweizer-Renecke line.

said that he felt he would not be discharging his duty to his constituents if he did not protest against the proposed railways embodied in this Bill. A member who represented constituents in the area of the Witwatersand could not view with equanimity these proposed railway schemes. They knew in that area they could not expect further reductions in their railway rates, so long as these heavy deficiencies on lines in other parts of the country continued; and they knew that these further schemes of railway construction were going to entail an annual loss of £120,000. No one appreciated more than he did the important part that railways played in the development of the country and the social life of the people. These railway schemes seemed to him to have had the effect of increasing the value of the farmers’ land. They had heard a great deal about “unearned increment.” He knew of no more striking case of unearned increment than farms which had increased very much in value by reason of the construction of railways. He noticed on Saturday last a number of members of that House visited the district of Robertson to view some irrigation works According to the report in the “Argus,” he saw that one observant visitor said that the farmers were not getting more than one-tenth out of the land that they ought to get out of it. (Hear, hear.) It seemed to him that the same thing applied to him the railways of this country. They had opened up enormous tracts of country, and, if one went round the railway system and saw the amount of valuable land which had been opened up to the markets of the country, and how little had been done with it, he thought one would hesitate before going in for any further railway construction, at any rate until such time as this country was in a stronger financial position, and until those who received the benefits from railway construction were called upon to contribute towards some of the benefits they received. Railways which would pay at the start were railways which he would certainly advocate. He had heard some mentioned in the Transvaal. They had one, the extension through Swaziland, which was consented to some years ago. They had the Geduld - Springs - Heidelberg extension, which was mentioned by the hon. member for Germiston, and which was received in that House with something like merriment. That was a railway which would pay from the very start. It passed through a country which possessed great agricultural possibilities and great mineral wealth. Such schemes as they had before them just now were schemes to which he for one could never give his assent.

said he was sorry for the Minister. The hon. member for Oudtshoorn had already two lines of railway, and now he wanted another one 36 miles in length. The hon. member for Beaufort West had stated that the line to Carnarvon would go through a barren district, but he would point out that the line from Laingsburg to Beaufort West passed through a similarly barren area.

It was to be regretted that the Bill had been brought before the House so late in the session, as their constituents ought to have had a chance to examine the proposed lines. The Minister could not, however, help that.

The speaker expressed his disappointment at the recommendations which the Board had made, as out of the fourteen lines proposed he knew little or nothing of thirteen of them. He was well acquainted with the district from Carnarvon to Calvinia. It had been said that the line was to be built in order that it should foe of service to certain people.

When the line to Carnarvon was constructed, it was with the object of extending it to Calvinia. Places like Laxton and Fraserburg were entitled to have railway connection, and the speaker had therefore supported a line from a point closer to Beaufort West over Loxton, along the Zak River, and then as close as possible to Fraserburg.

It was formerly said that the line to Carnarvon would not show a profit. A good many slaughter cattle were being bred along that line, and it had contributed substantially towards the development of the country. In connection with the lengthening of the line, he was in favour of continuing it to a place 18 miles past Victoria West along the Brak River, then to Loxton, thence along the Zak River, and then as close as possible to Fraserburg. That would be the best line for the development of that district. He did not wish to destroy the Bill, but it would be well worth while, in order to obtain further information, to postpone the line for another twelve months.

In his opinion the Railway Board were not well informed as to the facts, and he opposed them for that reason. So far as the other lines were concerned the speaker knew nothing, except the fact that lines of 13½, 14, and 19 miles in length were being proposed. Those people had already a railway at their very doors, and he quite failed to see the necessity of building the new ones.

One portion of the country was full of railways whilst another portion of the country had to pay for them. One part of the country paid the taxes, whilst another part of it reaped the benefit of it. The parts which were taxed had paid for railways in other districts, and it was therefore unfair to ask those who would benefit by the building of lines to contribute to the cost of constructing them.

The north-western districts namely, Gordonia, Kenhardt, Upington, and Hay, required to have a railway. The line at Prieska should be extended to Gordonia to a point near the waterfalls a total length of 200 or 300 miles. The Railway Board never came there because they knew if they did they would be obliged immediately to recommend the building of a railway. Such a line would go through good corn country, and would pass Kakamas, where 3,000 people lived. There was good ground in Gordonia, and speculators were already there buying ground at low prices. If they carried the railway to that place, there would be a good opportunity to Settle their own people on it, people who at present had no ground. The Kalahari was very suitable for cattle breeding. It was a district as large as the Free State, and had not at present a single inch of railway. Yet the people in that district had to share in all the debits of the country and had to pay the usual taxation. But he felt that his was as a voice calling in the wilderness. He had many times asked the Minister what was proposed to be done in the speaker’s constituency, and the Minister had promised to inquire into it. Nothing, however, was proposed to be done. Even if it were a line of 50 miles, just to make a beginning, he would be satisfied. But now they were required to wait another twelve months, and that was a shame. How could they develop the country in the absence of railway communication? He would not vote against the Bill, but he hoped the Minister would add another proposal in it for a line to run through the speaker’s constituency.

said the hon. member who had last spoken had spoken very eloquently regarding the needs of the great North-west, but how could he (Mr. Duncan) and other hon. members form an opinion as to whether the needs were greater than in other parts of the country. They did not possess information such as to justify them in forming any opinion as to whether those lines were desirable or not. The reports said nothing about the lines which could not be said about 20 other lines in South Africa. It was a farce to expect the House to form a proper judgment about railway construction with reports like that before thorn, and it would be a farce until the method was adopted which was intended by the Act of Union. A scheme for developing the whole country by means of railways should be laid before the country by the Railway Board, so that hon. members would have an opportunity of forming an opinion as to the merits of various lines. At present when the Government decided to build a railway line somewhere in the wilderness they asked the Board to report upon that, but with all due respect to the Board, they were not the best qualified people to report upon the payability of the proposed railway line. The country was getting no benefit from that section of the Act of Union which attempted, although in vain, to take the matter of railway construction away from the manner in which it had been dealt with at the present time and place it on higher ground. The money should be spent by a Parliament which had before it a disinterested view of the needs of the country as a whole. He himself was absolutely unable to pass an opinion which was worth anything with regard to those proposals, and he thought that nineteenths of hon. members were in a similar position to himself. The Government was flouting the conditions laid down by the Act of Union, and they had no guarantee that the money was not being largely wasted. With regard to the power of appropriation taken by the Minister, he was quite in the dark with regard to the Cape Province. The Minister said he was not satisfied with the power of expropriation he had at present, and did not feel disposed to build certain lines unless he could get land at the price he wanted. Section 4 of the Bill invested the Governor-General with the powers which Divisional Councils were entrusted with under the law of 1889. When they turned up that Act they would find that the Divisional Councils were given the rights of the Government, if any. (Laughter.) But their main point was that Parliament was not in a position to exercise judgment in a matter of this kind. There was no hurry about the scheme. Government could not spend the money even if it had the money for the simple reason that there was a programme still to be carried through. Why, then should their hands be tied by a programme of this character? He thought that this Bill might go where its predecessor of last session went—to the land of expectation. (Laughter.) By keeping back last year’s Bill the Government had saved a great deal of money, especially on one line, and one never knew how much more might not be saved if this Bill were delayed. (Laughter.) By next session a more comprehensive measure could be introduced.

regretted very much that there were so many political lines being built since the Railway Board had been appointed. The line from De la Rey to Schweizer Reneke and that from Schroeders to Wartburg was in his opinion unnecessary. He could not vote for the Bill if the Belmont to Douglas line were not built All the lines proposed in the Act of 1906 had been built except the Belmont-Douglas line. The speaker proceeded to describe the richness of the district, its fruitfulness, and the great salt production, in order to show that railway communication there was most necessary. The district was capable of becoming the grain barn of South Africa, and it would not be necessary to import a single bag of corn if they had a railway. It was the first duty of the House to build a railway to the remote districts in the north-west. Behind the Langeberg they found the most fruitful soils, and a railway would make it possible for the farmers to bring their cattle and produce to the markets. He appealed to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Railways and Harbours to carry out the Act of 1906 and to build a railway from Belmont to Douglas. He hoped that during the present session the money required for that line would be placed on the Estimates.

moved the adjournment of the debate.

Agreed to.

The debate was adjourned till tomorrow.