I move, as an unopposed motion—

I think we have all met to-day under the strong feeling that the House, since it adjourned in August last, has received a severe blow. It has never vet occurred in the history of this House, nor ever, I even believe, in a gathering of so small a number of members as we are, that no less than three members have passed away within six months. Amongst the three is Sir William Macintosh, who—I think that I can say this without fearing that a single hon. member would differ—notwithstanding the fact that he was a fighter who gave many blows, and also had to take many, was always a man who, as soon as the strife was over, was a true friend, and certainly a man who with heart and soul always looked after the public duties which he from time to time took upon himself. Sir William Macintosh was a person in public life who was known in nearly every department. In Port Elizabeth he was head of the town more than once. More than once, too, he was the head of the mercantile community. In the interests of the State he was the representative first of the old Cape Government and subsequently of the Union Government. He represented the Government at customs conferences in the old days of the Cape Government, and, subsequently, we know that the Prime Minister took him to London in 1923 to serve as financial and industrial adviser at the two imperial conferences which we then held. I do not think any one of us, when he left in August, thought that that would be the last time we would see him in this House, although everyone knew of the suffering he had had to endure since his illness about six years ago. He was a man for whom I always had the highest feeling of friendship, and one who always showed that it was his desire to advance the interests of South Africa, and it is in that spirit that I propose the motion.

I second the motion and associate myself with those on this side of the House with what he has said. This is not the time now to think of Sir William Macintosh as the friend we have lost, but rather to think of the services he has rendered to South Africa and of his devotion to public duty. We often hear it said that our leaders of business, commerce and industry in this country do not give enough of their time to assisting in public affairs, but find themselves too much engrossed in their own business to give the necessary attention to the affairs of the country. Sir William is a notable exception. Early in his career he felt the call of public duty, and right throughout to the very end he answered that call: he may be said to have died in harness. From 1905 onwards, as the Prime Minister has said, he has a record of parliamentary service, and has served on many bodies and commissions of various sorts, always with the intention of improving the condition of affairs in South Africa, and its interests. He never put party before country and personalities before principles. Both sides of the House will miss for a long time his wise counsel, always willingly given, his experience of finance and commerce, his wide knowledge of the affairs of the country, and the ready help he always extended to those who needed his advice and counsel, his wide and tolerant outlook on affairs. But we shall be richer and better for the example he set, his devotion to public duty and to the interests of the country.

Agreed to unanimously, all members standing.

I move, as an unopposed motion—

I think that is what the House has always felt about the late hon. member, who, I think, also died quite unexpectedly, is what we have always heard in the House, even when the biggest fights were in progress between the supporters of the Government and the Opposition. Although our deceased friend came in for his full share of attacks, it never occurred but that immediately after the debate, or even whilst still in progress, he was spoken to as “Oom Louw.” Oom Louw he always remained to everybody, and that is possibly a proof of the deep friendship there is on such occasions, even when there is a heavy fight on in the House. The deceased was one who could be called a pioneer in our country; he was one of the Johannesburg pioneers; one of the oldest inhabitants there, and Johannesburg found him installed there. In the days of the old republic he was a member of the Second Chamber. He had the confidence of the Government of the day and he was present at the last secret session before the outbreak of the second war of independence. He became a member of this House in 1910, and I feel that we shall all miss him now that he has been taken away. We all feel that there was an association between the deceased and ourselves which compels us, on this occasion, to pass a motion of deep sympathy.

I should like to join the Prime Minister and heartily second this motion and endorse the sympathetic words he has spoken. It is almost incomprehensible to think that the deceased has been taken away from us during, these few months. I think it was in September, after the last session, when he was still full of the zest of life, and shortly thereafter he was snatched away from our midst. It is a great loss to us, both personally and in public life. In many respects he was a typical South African, conservative and strict in principle. He was never ashamed of his opinions, and that was probably the power of his friendship about which the Prime Minister spoke. He kept nothing back, and yet, when he expressed his opinion, he made no enemies. There was another characteristic which he possessed, which helped him in his public life, and that was his deep sense of religion. Whenever any social question was debated in the House he always tested the merits of the matter by his religion. His public life was a life of service to his fatherland— surely the best thing that a man, who is a patriot, can do on behalf of his country. I think the example of our late friend will not only live amongst his colleagues, but will also benefit wider circles in South Africa. I associate myself with the Prime Minister in supporting the motion.

Agreed to unanimously, all members standing.

I move, as an unopposed motion—

Here we are concerned with an hon. member whom we can, perhaps, still call one of the younger members of the House. While both the others had had a parliamentary career behind them of about twenty years, his period of service has only amounted to four or five years, but, notwithstanding that, I think he was one of those quiet members whom it was difficult to get into contact with, yet not one of us in the House will soon forget his personality. I always felt when I came into touch with Brig.-Gen. Arnott that there was great generosity in his personality which sometimes made me think: well, a soldier’s career was the last occupation for this man. He always struck me as being more in his true vocation which he followed during recent years, namely, that of a farmer. I believe that he spoke in the House during the last few years as a farmer, a man, and as a member of the House, and we feel that someone has gone who has left something behind which we shall bear in mind for a long time.

I second the motion and endorse what the Prime Minister has said. I am sure that very few of us, when we parted at the end of last session, could have thought that we were not to see again the face of our genial friend Brig.-Gen. Arnott. He was a man who had many friends, and, so far as I know, no enemies. He had that kindliness of disposition which the Prime Minister has mentioned, which endeared him to everyone with whom he came into contact. From the parliamentary point of view he was, as the Prime Minister has said, a young man. His parliamentary age was a short one; but long before he came into parliament he had done much for his country, for that part of South Africa to which he belonged. He had served in her wars, and, as the Prime Minister has said, his outlook was not that of the soldier; still, he did good service when the call came. But his real interests lay on the land and in the promotion of the cattle-breeding industry. That is where his real interests lay. I believe he regarded his parliamentary work as a means to further the development and the improvement of the cattle-breeding industry of South Africa. He believed not in words so much as in work. He talked but seldom, and, as a rule, only when it had some bearing on the subject nearest his heart. He was a man in whose mind and spirit there was no room for personal bitternesses; he believed in co-operation for the common good of the country, and the work that he has done in that respect will be remembered. We shall all miss his presence, and regret that he has been taken from us.

I desire to associate myself most sincerely with the remarks that have fallen from the hon. the Prime Minister and the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan). I feel that I must say a few words on this occasion, because, not only have I lost a colleague, but I have lost a friend of over thirty years’ standing. The services of Brig.-Gen. Arnott, both as a soldier and as a farmer, have been alluded to, and it has also been stated that he was a man who spoke infrequently in this House and that he was only here for a short period. During the twenty years since Union, a number of distinguished members have passed away; some of them were marked by their humaneness, geniality and general bonhomie. There have been altogether, since Union, half-a-dozen members who will long be remembered for the possession of these traits. Brig.-Gen. Arnott will be one of those whose memory will be kept green by the remembrance of these endearing qualities. A more genial and generous man I have never met; he was a prime favourite on both sides of the House. When he spoke, which he did rarely, you could always hear his voice, and it is hard to believe that we shall never hear that stentorian voice again. I sincerely associate myself with the remarks that have fallen from the previous speakers.

Agreed to unanimously, all members standing.