This Bill, as the Minister told us, in introducing his motion yesterday, is in form a Bill of detail, amending in certain details the Act which has been on our statute book since 1923, and with the principle of which I think we are all in agreement; but this Bill does amend that Act in certain important respects and I think it raises questions of principle to which we will devote a little time now. The question of the relations between the native and the European populations has advanced a good deal since 1923 and has become in some respects more acute. I think in connection with this Bill there are certain points on which the attention of this House ought to be fixed. We are in agreement with the principle of the Act of 1923 and of this Bill in that these measures aim at segregation in urban areas; I think we are all agreed—not only the European population, but I think the majority of the thinking elements of the native population are also agreed—that segregation in urban areas is a desirable thing; consequently the Act of 1923 and this Bill aim mainly at two matters— one of which is the control of entrance to local areas and the control to a certain extent of the native inhabitants of those urban areas, and the other is what one may call the power of control and to prevent as far as possible the coming into being of what are known as slum areas. There is no doubt that increased power is necessary to enable urban local authorities to deal with the drift of natives into the towns. One knows that in the big centres of population in the Union this drift is causing serious embarrassment, and that the better the provision a town council makes and the more money they spend to provide accommodation for their native inhabitants, the more they tend to attract this drifting population into the towns; as soon as they make provision to meet the requirements of the day they are swamped. Undoubtedly some provision is necessary to give them some control over natives coming into that area and control over the inhabitants who are there now; but I would suggest to the House that in a Bill like this we are dealing with only one point of the problem—it is not enough to give the town councils power to stop natives coming in; you have to think also of the causes which make them come in. You have to try to stop the drift at its source, and not merely give a town council power to turn away these people when they come. Although in form the Bill is of municipal ambit in giving power to municipal councils, it really touches national and not merely urban problems. Why do these natives drift into the towns? There is a certain attraction to people of all kinds both white and black to the towns, but above that the natives drift to the towns because we have not made sufficient provision for them to live outside. It is no good telling them to live in the reserves if there is not sufficient reserve to live in. We put every kind of economic pressure on them to drive them out of the reserves; we tax their blankets and put every tax on them, and compel them to come out of the reserves, and on the other hand we try to stop them coming into the towns. It must be dealt with not at the one end only, but at both ends. It is no use trying to save a ship with a bad leak only by working the pumps; you must also try to stop the leak. We have to try to give the natives an opportunity of living in their own reserves, if we hope to prevent their drifting into the towns as they are doing now. The other question is the abolition of slums. No legislation of this kind will prevent the coming into being of slum conditions in the towns until the native worker of the towns is able to live under civilized conditions. What are we doing now? We are trying to provide decent locations for them, but they cannot pay the rent of a house in a decent location. We are expecting local authorities to subsidize these locations, in order, in other words, to subsidize the employer who employs these natives at a wage upon which they cannot live under civilized conditions. While that continues the slums will go on, because these natives not only cannot afford to pay for decent houses for themselves but they reduce the standard of living of other workers outside the locations. Until this great gap between an uncivilized wage and a civilized wage is bridged you cannot expect to get away from the undesirable conditions with which you desire to cope. Although this Bill deals with additional powers to be given to municipalities, including power to do away with slum properties, it touches the whole question of the relations between the natives and the Europeans of the Union. I think it is a great pity that we have to deal with legislation of this kind piecemeal, to deal with it in pin pricks, and that there seems to be no body to go into these matters to show how this question of urban areas hangs upon the question of the Native Land Act, and other Acts dealing with natives throughout the country. They are all closely connected. I was hoping at one time that the Native Affairs Commission might perform this function, and that they might present us with a document showing how we have to got to deal with the question as a whole. Because dealing with it in bits causes a certain amount of irritation. I am not opposing the Bill. The principle of the measure is perfectly good, but in its administration the Government must never forget that you cannot deal with this thing as an isolated problem. It is bound up with the whole question of the relations of the natives with Europeans, with the question of the native reserves, and the question of the natives’ right to obtain land and other questions. I think the Minister would be wise to allow this Bill to go to a select committee, where evidence could be taken, particularly from natives who are affected or likely to be affected. The Bill was referred to a select committee in the last session of the last Parliament. It was referred to the Select Committee on Native Affairs, and I understand that before that committee evidence was offered on behalf of various persons and bodies, and also on behalf of certain natives; but the committee reported that owing to the approaching end of the session they were unable to hear this evidence. I think that constitutes a very strong reason why we should send this Bill to a select committee—naturally after the second reading has been taken—and allow anybody, and particularly natives who may be concerned, to come forward and give evidence. In considering a Bill like this, you have got to take account of something more than the actual provisions of the Bill. Some of the provisions are rather drastic, and some of them, no doubt, will meet with objections, but you have to consider also the whole attitude of the native peoples towards us who deal with their affairs. They are almost entirely unrepresented in this House. They have no means, outside the Cape Province, of having their views put directly before this House, and that should make us more careful to take them with us. There is a large body of native opinion, I believe, which would be in favour of most of the provisions in this Bill. Don’t let us drive them back upon the agitator. I don’t want to say what the causes of it may be, but I am afraid that at the present time, as far as one can see, the attitude of the native peoples towards us seems to be one of a loss of confidence, a loss of confidence in their getting a fair deal. They believe, rightly or wrongly—I am not certain saying whether it is justified or not—that the Government’s ideas with regard to them is that they are here to do the menial work of the country, that they are here to do any work that the white man does not want to do, and to do it at as low a wage as they possibly can, and that we are against their having any outlet, any opportunity to utilize their faculties to advance in civilization. They believe that the prevailing spirit among us is one of discouragement against any attempt on their part to use the powers they have to rise in the world, and they believe that our one remedy for any of their discontents is force. I would most earnestly put it before the House that you cannot govern by force. You cannot govern even the native population by force. Bayonets and bombs may sometimes be necessary, I am not saying that they are not, but you cannot govern by them. In the long run the only foundation for government is the acquiescence of the people who are governed. It is for us to secure that acquiescence on the part of the well-disposed natives. We should make an effort to show them that we are going to take them into our confidence, and to give them a chance of expressing their views. The hon. the Minister told us that the Native Affairs Commission has gone down to various centres to make inquiries, but we had no evidence as to what they did. I think for that reason also that it would be an excellent thing for the Government if the hon. the Minister would allow this Bill to go to select committee. Never mind if it takes a little longer. Give them an opportunity to put forward their views.

On what points ?

About any points they are affected by.

But they cannot go outside the Bill.

No, of course they cannot. I see in to-day’s paper that an advisory board has raised quite a number of points that the natives object to. I am sorry the hon. the Minister has not found out more about it, but there are a number of points they wish to raise and why not let them do so? Why say they must obey this clause or the other clause whether they want to or not? You cannot govern a people like the native population by force, you have to take them along with you. You must gain their consent; if not their consent, at least their acquiescence. Give them the impression that they have a say in these matters. You must not destroy the confidence of the natives that they are going to get a fair deal from the white man. If once that confidence is lost, then very serious results may ensue. Let them know that they are going to be consulted. I do not propose to go into the details of the Bill, because we can consult in committee, but there are one or two points which require some consideration. Section (4) contains a power which seems very extraordinary under the provisions of sub-section (1); where a native acquires land outside his urban area, but inside the area of another urban local authority within whose area of jurisdiction it was prior to such acquisition, that land becomes part of its own boundaries.

What about Durban ?

I do not know the peculiar conditions of Durban, but I should think that it might lead to serious trouble if this sort of thing could be done without consultation, and there is no opportunity for any other local authority being consulted. I can imagine what would happen if the Durban Town Council went and purchased land within the Johannesburg municipality. Johannesburg has no right to object, and it would wake up one day and find that it had lost part of its municipal area. There is another point to which I wish to draw attention. Under Section (6), which means Section (17) of the Old Act, it is provided that local authorities are given powers to deal with natives who are habitually unemployed, though that may be through no fault of their own; if they have no sufficient honest means of livelihood, or are living an idle or dissolute life or have been convicted of serious offences. If a native has been convicted of any serious offence, he can be evicted from the area or he can be sentenced to detention in a farm colony, or a labour colony, or a rescue home. I hope that this power is going to be used with a certain amount of care. This is another point where this Bill touches not merely municipal or urban interests, but national interests. I have heard my friends on various municipalities say: This is just what we want. This is the opportunity we have been looking for to get rid of thousands of natives who are not wanted.

They cannot come to Bethal.

Can they go to Yeoville ?

Well, I am not sure about that. You will have to give them the right of appeal. Five thousand natives is the figure quoted, and where are they to go to if every municipality has unrestricted powers to clear out the inhabitants of any location and send them elsewhere? Some effort must be made by the State to see what is to be done with them, otherwise you will have the country overrun with them. There are certain other points which can be dealt with further when the Bill comes into committee, but I will just repeat what I have said about general principles. We must not regard this as a matter of local administration to give local councils and urban authorities more power over the natives than they have at present. Now it goes much further than that. For that reason and other reasons I have mentioned we must carry the native with us in this matter, and show that we have some sympathy with them in their aims and ambitions. I trust the Minister will allow this measure to go to select committee in order that a fuller opportunity of discussion may be given there.

I intervene unwillingly in this debate, but owing to the close connection I held during the past year with native affairs, I think it is desirable I should say a few-words. I want to say at once that I think that we ought to welcome any reasonable and sound criticism of any hon. member about native affairs, but I must say the words we have just heard from my hon. friend the member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) do not altogether please me, and I think the time has come that, as men who are all desirous of doing everything possible in the real interests of the native, and at the same time of the Europeans in South Africa, we should always endeavour to see that a healthy national life can be lived in South Africa. Now I do not believe that the words we have just listened to are cultivated to give just that tone to the natives in their action with regard to South Africa, that there ought to be. Undoubtedly the hon. member stated that everything was not being done for the natives that ought to be done. Now I will at once admit that the attention given to native affairs could sometimes be a little improved upon, but when it is stated—as has been done here—that the natives are streaming into the towns to-day because they do not know where else to establish themselves, then I say it is untrue. When, moreover, the hon. member ascribes it—and one must come to that inference—to the Native Land Act of 1913, then I think he is completely off the rails. I just want to point out how mistaken my hon. friend is. But let me first observe that by these very inaccuracies the natives are encouraged to adopt a line, and to ventilate grievances which they are not entitled to have. As for the Native Land Act of 1913, I want to ask my hon. friend whether he has thought how many provinces it is applicable to? It applies only to the northern provinces, but not in the Cape. Now I want to ask him whether the flocking to the urban areas is less than in the other provinces now.

Perhaps it is even worse.

Take Cape Town. I know, and have been assured, that when we left here in 1910 there were practically no natives in Cape Town, only a few in the docks, but to-day there are about 7,000 or 8,000, I think, who have flocked in during the past seven years, while the stream is still continuous, and Cape Town is just one of the centres where more come in than elsewhere. And they are not natives from the north but from the Cape Province, where the 1913 Act does not apply.

I did not blame the Act.

But the inference followed immediately from what you said, because you said that we must enquire how far the Native Land Act was the cause. My greatest complaint is that of that kind have such an extremely injurious effect on the education which is being made in the country by the natives. Let me take an example. A certain professor, whose name is from time to time heard here as one of the great experts, came to me with a report on an enquiry he had been making for some months in the Cape Province to investigate the economic condition of the native, and will you believe me when I say that the report, to a certain extent, attributed the bad economic position of the natives in the Cape Province to the Native Land Act of 1913, although it is not even in force here. That has to-day become one of the chief grounds on which the natives base their grievances, and now my hon. friend comes and repeats the same mistake of the professor and the result will be that the natives will now go and say that the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) got up and blamed the Act.

I merely said that the reserves were insufficient.

Is it so? Are not the reserves sufficient, or is the ground badly tilled and grazed? What is it? I want to ask my hon. friend whether Pondoland is too small for its population? Or is it a fact that Pondoland is under populated ?

What then is the Native Land Bill for ?

Because that provision has not merely been made for today but for the next fifty years. That is laid down in the Beaumont Commission Report itself. They did not provide for the needs of to-day, but for the next fifty years. Take Zululand. Is it over-populated? Is there one Natal member who will say so? We know that all the experts say that Zululand is under-populated and can carry many more people. How many times has not the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) pointed out that Zululand is under-populated, and on that fact based his argument that, insofar as Natal is concerned, no further land must be reserved for natives. Let me also tell my hon. friend that while I was in control of the department—up to last year—when it was brought to my notice that natives required land because otherwise they could not properly make a living, they were met. I obtained the necessary money from Parliament to buy land for them; only last year £60,000 for land near Lady Grey. During two years £100,000 has been spent in buying land, and purchases were constantly made in the Transvaal and elsewhere. That is not the reason. The reason for the rush to the towns is immediately plain when we just look at history. I am not going into the history of a country which my hon. friend knows more of than I, viz., England, but I refer him to the little book of Thorald Rodgers regarding the rush to the towns. He will see there that it cannot be stopped. The same economic conditions prevail here to-day, and the same thing happens with regard to Europeans, and it cannot be ascribed to the fact that the Europeans have no land. Of course we cannot give land to every native any more than we can to every European, and let us also understand clearly that eventually a large section of the natives will unavoidably come to the towns and villages as is the case to-day. We must therefore ask whether there are other causes, and then see whether we can remedy matters. Let me tell my hon. friend that the Department of Native Affairs has been engaged for some years now making the native understand how important it is to improve agriculture, and how they do so. The previous government made a start and we have continued with it very zealously. I feel it is not right to say anything which might bring the natives under the impression directly or by inference—as I have done in connection with the speech of the hon. member for Yeoville—that there are grievances affecting the native, and that they are justified to be unfriendly disposed towards the Europeans. Then the hon. member further says that the natives are not properly represented. I admit that they are not represented through their race, but in the case of the native in the Cape Province, I want to point out that they are represented in this House on the same footing—let us not forget it—as the Europeans themselves. I admit that the native on the existing basis will never be so well represented, and that the representation will never be of the same value as when he can more particularly look to his representatives. For this reason I urged last year that we should enable the natives to have representatives who are their own representatives, and whose first duty would be to look after native interests, and nothing else. I do not want to go into that further, but now my hon. friend says that we are referring the Bill to a select committee, it was referred to a select committee last year, who went fully into it, and to-day I think three or four minor further amendments are being proposed, but I do not really believe that it is necessary to refer it to a select committee again. I leave it of course in the hands of the Minister of Native Affairs. I want, however, to point out that the hon. member for Yeoville says that an opportunity should now be given to the natives to come before the select committee and air their grievances. That would in my opinion be so wrong that I cannot believe that my hon. friend will insist on it. If I am to go by the words he used, then it practically means that the native is to understand that he has so much cause for complaint in various directions that, although this Bill merely deals with special points, they should now have an opportunity to come before a select committee, and not only to express their views with regard to the interests of urban natives, but that they will also come and deal with the causes and reasons for complaints in connection with the causes, etc.

No, it can be restricted to the Bill.

Then I do not see why we should consult the native. My hon. friend himself and other hon. members are members of the Joint Council, and in a large place like Johannesburg they enjoy the full confidence of the native, and they know the circumstances. I do not see of what use the evidence of the natives can be. I, however, blame his speech because it says that the natives have reason for grievances in connection with this Bill. I do not think we ought to assume such a position, unless the hon. member will specifically lay his finger on this or the other thing which is wrong, and will indicate why the natives are required. If my hon. friend can point out definite faults where the natives can assist us with information, I shall certainly be prepared to go into them, but the general manner in which he referred to it does not assist much. If there was a native in this House at the time who listened to the speech of the hon. member, he must have concluded that the natives were not being properly treated, and that they should be given an opportunity of airing their grievances. That is my complaint against the speech. The hon. member further said that we must not only deal with matters from one side, but from its various sides, and try to solve the problem from various points. I agree with him; but this does not detract from our having to deal with it subject by subject, and at present we have this material which is undoubtedly urgently required in Johannesburg, and it is absolutely necessary in connection with the position of natives in urban areas to pass the amendments in this Bill as speedily as possible.

I just want to make one remark on the Prime Minister’s speech. I am sorry he has implied that the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) attacked the 1913 Act. I can say that we, on this side of the House, stand by that Act. We cannot possibly abandon that position. We must continue to build on the basis of that Act. The hon. member for Yeoville was a member of a Cabinet which was responsible for the Act of 1923, and I think that the 1923 Natives in Urban Areas Act, an Act which continues the segregation policy, is built on the foundations of the 1913 Act. True relates to urban areas, but yet it is built on the 1913 Act that natives cannot come into certain areas without being placed under restriction. It was a continuance of the 1913 Act, and the Prime Minister must not give the impression that we want to take anything away from that Act. The hon. member for Yeoville did not intend that. He said that it might be that the reserves were not adequate at present, and that the natives were therefore streaming into the towns. In his opinion it is a matter for investigation. The Prime Minister knows that we have heard evidence on that point during the last three years. Whether the areas are not large enough, or whether the ground is not properly cultivated, the cause of the rush to the towns still lies in those areas. What the hon. member for Yeoville intended was that he thought that for that reason enquiry should be made as to the conditions in the areas. That is a fair criticism, and there is surely no harm in it. If the Minister for Native Affairs will agree to refer the Bill to a select committee, so that on an important point like this the natives can appear before the committee, we can ask them why they are coming into the towns. The select committee on a former occasion reported that there was no opportunity to hear evidence of this kind. The Government can refuse the request but the hon. member for Yeoville did not intend to create the impression among the natives that the Europeans refused to treat them properly. The Minister will, however, be wise in agreeing to the committee. We cannot deny that there is a bad spirit among the natives in the country, whether due to the agitators or not, and we can surely do no harm to give these people a hearing. If the Government sees its way to agree to a select committee it will be a very wise course.

I have listened with astonishment to the speech of the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan), who is not, indeed, a Transvaaler born, but I always regard him as one, and he knows very well how the Transvaal thinks on this matter. His speech reminds us of those of the people who always are far up in the clouds like idealists, who do not know the practical difficulty we have in the Transvaal. I feel that it is urgently necessary to make the provisions contained in this Bill, and I do not know why it is necessary to send the measure to a select committee.

Why was it sent to one last year ?

Then I was in favour of it, but that is the very reason why it is unnecessary now.

But then they were not satisfied with it;

Everyone was satisfied except, possibly, the hon. member. In answer to an interjection he said that their reserves were too small, and he then asked me whether I would be able to make a living in one of the reserves. Such a question is mere nonsense. I might just as well ask him if he could make a living in the towns with the white labourers, people who work for 6/- a day. His method of living is entirely different. Nor can he expect that I should live like a native. I would give the hon. member the chief reason why the natives are flocking to the towns. He has probably noticed that the stream consists chiefly of young natives. I have had a good example of this. One of the headmen came to me with a complaint that they could no longer control the young natives. They are simply leaving their parents and refusing to help with the work and the stock. They go to the villages where they can go to the bioscopes and walk about with their companions in the streets on Sundays. The headman added that they would all abandon their huts if the Government did not assist the parents. He also said that the young women were also commencing to go to the towns, and they came back ruined. I shall not now say how he put the matter. It is not because they cannot make a living in the reserves. It is the easy life and the pleasure in the towns which causes them to leave the countryside. There are many farmers who need them, and where they can get grazing for their stock, and a place to live, if they would only work for three months in the year. But, no, they will not work, and want to go to the towns where they can get £3 a month and parade the streets. Those people have not the education we have, and it is our duty to see that such things do not occur, because otherwise the towns will shortly have an excessive native population. The hon. member can now say that we must not object to the native going away from the land if he can make a better living in the towns. The same applies to the white man. Are we then to allow the stream to the towns to continue, so that in time we shall have no one on the countryside? No, we must try to stop it, and we must keep as many people on the land as possible, because the farmer is the backbone of the country. We want the farmers to continue their activities, but if we do not provide them with the necessary help, how are they to continue their work? No, it is not the circumstances which are driving the natives to the towns, just as little as it is the circumstances in the country that are driving many Europeans to the towns. It is the more easy life, and the pleasures in the towns that attract the people. Possibly they earn more, but the reason is that they do not work so hard. It is our duty to stop this kind of thing, and if we do not, I foresee a sad future for the country.

I wholeheartedly welcome this Bill, but I cannot see that any good purpose is going to be served by sending it to a select committee. Surely this matter has been before the country for a long enough time, and if it is sent to a select committee it is going to mean unnecessary delay. The one feature that this Bill purports to deal with is this stream of natives from agricultural or country areas to urban areas. It is a greater stream than hon. members realize The reason is that land is becoming more valuable and scarce. Young South African farmers are growing up, farms are being sub-divided, and natives are being ejected. We have to beat in mind that the natives born and bred on these farms are agriculturally trained. And this stream of labour going to the urban areas is more or less unsuitable for the conditions of labour which obtain in the urban areas. There is a good deal of unemployment caused thereby. They are not used to the work demanded of them in the towns, and vagrancy, crime and various other ills follow in the train of this unemployment. The cry that more land is wanted for these natives is a true one, and I am one of those who think that extra land should be provided for them. The natives are overcrowded in the locations in Natal. It is quite unjust to expect these people to become derelicts in the towns. It would not take a great deal of land to supply their wants as far as Natal is concerned. I should think that 200,000 acres adjoining the present locations would be enough, and there is ample land which can be secured at a reasonable price. That provision should, I think, be made by the Government. My hon. friend of Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) has referred to the taxation borne by the natives. After all, what are the taxes? There is the personal tax, but as far as clothing is concerned, we know that in Natal, except at high altitudes, clothing to the native is superfluous. I don’t see that taxation affects them. I regard them as the gentlemen of South Africa. They have free land, and as much stock as they want, and if they please to work they can work, and if they don’t want to, they need not work, and they can have far more wives than the Europeans can. I was surprised this morning to read in the Press the causuit criticism of the Congress of Native Location Advisory Boards, who condemn as slavery the introduction of the curfew. There is a certain class of people who rush in where angels fear to tread. If the members of this congress lived in the towns in Natal they would have a very different opinion about the introduction of the curfew. In the larger towns in Natal, since the curfew has ceased to operate, one cannot move about the streets with security. I myself witnessed a policeman being chased by young natives, at about half past ten at night, with drawn knives. The natives don’t appreciate the freedom they have bad. They are abusing it, and the sooner this Bill is passed the better Natal will be pleased. Natal welcomes this Bill from one end of the province to the other. They want to see the curfew in operation again. In Pietermaritzburg a native village scheme has been embarked upon, which is working very well. Its dimensions are not as great as the locations of Johannesburg, of course, but progress is being made to meet the needs of the native population. It was my privilege to go through one of those villages in Johannesburg, and it was an education to me in respect of the provision made for the elevation of the native. The supply of houses and the management surprised me. The different tribes were not segregated but mixed up, and the manager told me it worked well. One can see that if the tribes were kept separate all sorts of trouble might result. I think these villages serve an excellent purpose, and any hon. member who doubts the wisdom of our policy in that respect, should visit these places. He would then realize that every encouragement should be given to these large urban areas to extend these locations. One has only got to remember recent events in Durban to realize what a near thing it was in Durban that there was no bloodshed. The avoidance of bloodshed was due to the praiseworthy action of the Minister of Justice. I am not speaking from heresay; I was on the spot. I was also in Durban when the first riot took place, and saw the effect of that. I am not a youngster. I have held a responsible position in this country. I had charge of defence during the 1906 rebellion in Natal, and I saw and learnt then signs and indications which are not wanting at the present time. I heartily support this Bill, and when I say that, I feel that I am echoing the sentiments of the whole of Natal.

I venture to think that of all the important legislation which has been introduced "by the Government this session, there is none which is more important than that which is before the House at the present time. It is true that when you touch the relations which prevail between white and black in the towns, you are getting deep down to the root of the native question. The legislation which is tabled now affects the relations between white and black in all their complexity. I rise to support the second reading of this Bill, but I do hope that its provisions may be strengthened in certain directions. I think it would be unfortunate if this Bill was to be considered merely in the way of certain tabulated amendments to an old standing Act of Parliament. It really does mark a very distinct departure from that old Act of Parliament. The hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) and the hon. member for Caledon (Mr. Krige) have emphasized the principles of that old Act of Parliament. I think there is a very general unanimity in this House and outside with regard to them. The hon. member for Yeoville has said that with the principles of that Act and of this Bill we are all agreed. I hope that the principles, the real principles, underlying that Act and this Bill will be realized, and I proceed to give what I conceive to be the principles underlying that Act and this Bill, for the purpose of judging whether they are appropriate to the present conditions. Now what are the principles which underlie that Act? The Act, which is at present on the statute book, provides for the control of natives within urban areas after a very special manner, on quite distinct lines from the white population of those areas, and lays down measures for their control which are quite inapplicable for the control of white persons. No one would suggest that the same principles should apply. There is, first of all, permissive control given to the local authorities; it is permissive, but not compulsory. The permissive control is arranged under these heads. First of all, you may lay aside certain areas in which the native population can be segregated. They can be leased on a leasehold, not a freehold tenure, and you are to allow them a share in their own government. You are to eject from the municipal area all natives who are found to be dissolute or undesirable, or out of work, etc., and you are to allow the possible registration of contracts which may be entered into by those natives. I submit the real principle which underlies that is this. We recognize that the presence of the natives in their urban areas is to be permitted just so long as, and no longer than, the interests of the white population require, and that the steps which are taken for the removal of undesirable natives is the quintessence of the spirit of that Act. That is a very fair ruling principle, if it is once recognized that this is the principle that determines the relations between white and black over the whole length and breadth of the sub-continent may be profoundly affected. Now this provision of the Act has fallen short is certain respects. It has been found that the freedom for the native people to enter into and move about in the urban areas at their own free will, has rendered the control absolutely impossible. It has also led to this result, that the provision for good housing and good conditions which the Act brought into being, has rendered the town a more desirable place of resort for the natives than ever before, and the more you improve conditions and the better housing you give to the natives in urban areas, the more attractive the town will become to them, and having come in, they will make a demand for such wages as will enable them to live up to the European standard.

Why not?

All right, why not? I simply state the fact. If you accept the principle underlying the Act was that the natives should only enter an urban area when it was desirable in the interests of white people, then you are un against a very stiff proposition. Now the Act has failed in bringing about the desired condition that the natives should be in the urban area for the purpose of administering to the wants of the white people, and this is really the principle of the Act. I am strengthened in this conclusion by the terms of an agreement which was come to in 1921 at a meeting of the Native Affairs Commission and higher officials of the Native Affairs Department being present, at which the principle was enunciated as follows—

They defined the redundant native as one who was required to administer to the wants of the white population, but does not include the native who ministers to the needs of his fellows within the municipal area. If that principle is conceded, I say this Bill falls short of the necessary measures for carrying out the desired result. I admit that the Bill drafted is a considerable step forward, but it still fails to provide an effective means of removing redundant natives. The conditions which prevail can be summarized as follows: Natives, undesirable in respect of earning a living, idle or disorderly natives, etc., will flock into the towns. I do not propose to consider the causes which brought them in. This has already been stressed as to the causes which bring them into the towns. Never mind about the causes, let us agree upon the fact. It is indisputable that they are coming in such largely increased numbers that the municipal authorities will have difficulty in exercising powers of control. But there is already in residence in urban areas a very excessive native population, if you accept the standard of redundant natives which was laid down at that conference. The result has been that there has been great competition between white and black economically. We are faced with the unemployment of a large number of whites in the same way as we are faced with increased amount of occupation which is given to natives in urban areas. Now it has been said that the more natives you give employment to, the more employment there will be for whites. That statement taken literally is untrue, but there are certain classes of occupation in which the demand for native labour on the part of whites is great and insistent, but there are other occupations in which white youths are suitable for undertaking work for which natives are quite unsuitable. The more natives you bring in to these walks of life, the harder it will be for the white youths to find employment in them. Such figures as there are available are rather alarming. The Department of Labour has not given us any statistics on the same lines as those available in other countries which would enable us to gauge the amount of unemployment which exists in this country at the present time, but I have found in the “Social and Industrial Review” for January certain alarming figures which point out the amount of unemployment which exists. I see that the applications for work registered at the Government exchanges in 1909 were 3,072, and of these it was only possible to place 933, that is about one-third of the applications in a single month could be placed. There are a number of detailed figures going to show it. Therefore. I say this: it is rather a difficulty of the placings which take place. About one-third of them are absorbed into private employment, and about two-thirds of them roughly go to Government or public departments. Well, I say when we have figures like that we view them with very great alarm, and it goes to show that so far from the question of unemployment having been settled, disposed of, and cured, as we were given to understand some time ago in public speeches by more than one Minister opposite, so far from that being true, the correct position is that we are faced with an alarming amount of unemployment. The only method in which it is being tackled at all, according to the statistics in this “Review,” is by their being mainly absorbed in one or other of the public services, namely, municipal, provincial or national. That is an alarming state of affairs. What is the cause of it? One of the prime causes, I think, is the presence of this redundant black population in our urban areas, and if you are going to confine your attention merely to preventing a further increase of the natives in the urban areas you are only trifling with the question and leaving the problem more than half undone. You have a large black population permanently resident and domiciled in the great towns of South Africa, and in the smaller towns of South Africa as well. We know that they have increased. The natural increase, without any ingress at all, is of no insignificant dimensions. How do you propose to deal with that? The original Act left that problem untouched, and I regret to see, searching the amendments to the Bill as carefully as I have been able to do, that the problem is still left untouched. The removal of disorderly natives is no mitigation of the position at all. You may find a policeman who has reason to think that a native on his beat is loafing about the streets and has not got any visible means of subsistence. He must arrest that native and take him to a special court and there he is tried. But how can you deal with the thousands and thousands of natives that we have there? I am told on credible police authority that there is a floating criminal population on the Rand of close on 2,000 who principally live by means of roguery. The authorities have been unable to cope with it. The measures in force are insufficient to enable these people to be weeded out. But if they could be weeded out, what are you going to do with them? By the provisions of this Bill they will be sent to the place to which they belong. Where do they belong to? Many of them have been born in the towns, and are part of the population in that particular area. What satisfaction is it if a native, say, in Boksburg, is found to be guilty of being a disorderly, or a criminal, person, and is sent back to the place to which he belongs, and that place is found to be Benoni? How much better off is the population? The Bill, I think, fails to deal with this aspect of the case. I suggest very strongly to the Minister in charge of the Bill, I beg of him, to consider this aspect of the case and see that necessary measures are introduced into the Bill to strengthen it in that respect. On the broad issue bow are we attempting to deal with the competition between black and white in the towns, or in South Africa as a whole? This Bill and the principles underlying it should make us take account of that, and take stock of our position in that respect, and make us overhaul our legislation and think very clearly indeed and very hard indeed before we pass a Bill and lose an opportunity of dealing with this matter in a radical way. I suggest that we are attempting to deal with the problem in the urban areas on these lines and by these measures; first of all, there is the question of education. We are spending a large amount on education, and it is intended to make the white youth very superior indeed in his attainments and qualifications to the native. What effect is that having? You are creating an increasing amount of distaste on the part of the white population for the humbler occupations. You are increasing the demand for a larger black population to minister in the humbler walks of life, to the wants of the white. What is the result? You are having a large number of whites who cannot find the higher jobs for which they aspire, and will not accept the humbler jobs. No community on the face of the whole world can consist solely of captains of industry, or high-grade clerks, or men of university degree. It is necessary that the white population, if it is to survive, should minister to its own wants, and should be capable of ministering to its own wants in small matters as well as in great. The remedial measures on the lines of education are not meeting the difficulty. In the colour bar you introduce different legislation. You say that we shall have certain walks in life in which the natives shall not be allowed to function at all. We all know that that has been practically a dead letter; that the colour bar Act has not been in force, in so far as it was formerly in force in the mining regulations. Therefore it is a dead letter. The Act is on the statute book, and it has been found undesirable or impracticable to put it into force. You have introduced three classes of legislation which is exemplified by the Wage Act and that is calculated to have this effect amongst others; you have a minimum wage beyond which you cannot employ people in certain walks. It is the subject matter of a delimitation, of an award under the minimum wage. What is the result? The result has been not to displace the blacks, but to raise the whites. Very largely indeed that has been the result, and we are faced now, so far as I see in this morning’s paper, with a demand in three different great trades for concerted action amongst the non-European populations for a minimum wage based upon a living allowance of £9 3s. 6d. per month. That is going to be conducted by all the well-known machinery of trade unionism and of combination and so on. Now what does this bring us to? It brings us to this: that the problem before South Africa at the present time is whether or not the black population is going to be the proletariat of South Africa. Are you willing, is the country willing, to accept that position coolly and quietly? Are we to look forward to a white aristocracy above and to a black proletariat beneath’? If you do, I say without a shadow of doubt, that as sure as the sun will rise to-morrow, your political institutions will be profoundly affected and involved if you come to that decision. If, on the other hand, you say that we shall not tolerate that, that we shall give the white population the opportunity of expressing itself in terms of work, even though they have not university degrees and have not got as far as the far-famed matric, if you say that, you will have to take effective measures to combat the intense competition that there is, especially in the lower walks of life, that might become fixed in the urban areas, and has given cause for the rising of the deplorable slums and the deplorable conditions at which this Bill is aimed.

What measures do you suggest ?

I am coming to that. The measure I suggest to combat it and to make it impossible to have unlimited competition in urban areas is the acceptance of the proposition that within an urban area the local authority will have the power of saying what native labour it requires. Granted that power, you render it impossible for there to be unlimited competition between whites and blacks.

That depends very much on the views of the local authority.

That is quite true, but I have no reason for doubt that the view of the average municipality will be a fair microcosm of the public opinion of South Africa. I don’t believe that in any district the white population will be so blind to their own interests as to sacrifice the future of their children for the purpose of extracting higher profits by having blacks instead of whites to work for them.

What about competition outside the municipal areas ?

Once you determine the line you are going to adopt inside municipal areas, you will determine the control of future action in dealing with the problem outside urban areas. If you adopt my suggestion, it will be quite capable of expansion to the districts outside urban areas, until you move on the lines of a fairly complete territorial segregation which is the aim I have in view.

What will you do with the surplus ?

Hon. members are asking me to jump from point to point very quickly, so, if I miss out some step in the argument, they must not blame me. The question of the surplus was dealt with by the Prime Minister in terms of very great certainty. If the statements of the Prime Minister this afternoon are correct, then the problem becomes a very small one indeed—the surplus can go to the place to which they belong, which are the native reserves, and where in the Transkei and Zululand there is ample scope for them. I have been to the Transkei to form a personal opinion on the matter, and in the course of a short visit I came to the conclusion that the Transkei would carry a very much denser population than it now does. The real trouble is the deplorably low standard of agriculture and stock and the incapacity of sustained effort of the native population. I had a long indaba with a councillor and his tribe, and I found that nearly all of them had worked on the Rand, and that they knew the mines very nearly as well as I do. The problem of how you are going to deal with their settlement need not be a bugbear. It is susceptible of a perfectly simple solution. I understand there is a very great demand for further native labour on the land.

What about the mines ?

They also require a very great deal of labour.

Where does the white man come in ?

By agreement between the directors of the mining industry and the mining department you will be able to fix a quota which will satisfy not only the Minister, but the people and the mining industry. Let that not be drawn as a red herring across the trail of my argument. I have not the slightest doubt that the needs of the mining industry can fairly be met, and the method I suggests— which is cleaning out your towns and removing the redundant black population from the towns—is calculated to have the effect of supplying the wants of the farming population and also the wants of the mines for a further supply of labour.

What about the whites ?

There is not the slightest reason why white men should not work on the farms. The more native labour there is, the greater the inducement will be to the farmer to extract a better living from a very reluctant soil. There will be no difficulty in either absorbing labour into other walks of industry, or in weeding out, I use the phrase in no offensive sense, the native population from the towns. There will be no practical difficulty in finding other walks of life in which natives can profitably be occupied or in replanting them in their native reserves. If the reserves are proved to be too small, the Prime Minister says he has funds for their enlargement. I may fairly claim to have met these objections of what we are going to do without redundant labour. Another objection has been raised, namely, what is the effect going to be on the industries in the towns. You may have one town saying it will reduce the native labour in its midst to a very small degree in order to absorb the white unemployed, but another town may go on a different principle and absorb the maximum number of blacks and allow the whites to go hang; then there will be an economic competition between the factories in these two towns. That is the position which should be faced. In the first instance, I have never yet found in any town in South Africa the city fathers blind to their own interests or blind to the interests of their constituents. Rather they have been urged forward to press the claims economic and financial of the particular town in which they dwell, and I think it is raising a bogey to suggest that if the power was given to the town councils in local areas, they would use it so recklessly as to threaten their economic existence and the existence of the industries in their midst. I think that our local government has deserved well of our townsmen, and on the whole, the great powers which have been given to municipalities have been proved to be wisely exercized. I do not want to take that as covering all details. There have been many blunders, but generally speaking, municipal government has justified its existence, and the trust reposed in town councils has been responded to altogether in a worthy manner. I believe that if this power was given to say how many natives they want in their local area—to say so many and no more, and that they have too many at the present time—not only cut off the supply coming in, but reduce the number who are there, it would be wisely exercized. We recognize that there are thousands of European unemployed, and we are going to try the experiment of reducing the number of natives in these towns in order that we may absorb in the ranks of industry, not the public service, that surplus. I think they will do it, and I believe they are prepared to make sacrifices on behalf of their children, and the white population will be perfectly prepared if it is pointed out to them that the unemployment in their, midst may be mitigated, and even cured, if they go so far as to reduce the number of natives in their midst. There are a large number of natives in urban areas who, while they may be employed, and while they do not fall within the category of being dissolute and disorderly as in the Bill of the Minister, and there are others who are unemployed, may be removed as redundant without touching the industries in the smallest degree, which are being carried on at present, My main complaint about the Bill as at present drafted is that the means of removing the redundant black population from the towns is for all practical purposes non-existent, and is confined to disorderly and dissolute persons, and persons of that description. I appeal to the Minister to consider very carefully whether the time has not come to take a hold step and grant to the local authorities, subject to the control of the proper Minister, power to be taken under this Bill to allow him after consultation with the town council concerned, and after full consultation with any other person he chooses to consult, to say not only whether the gates should be closed, but reduce the number of natives who are there, because unless that is done, I believe we are leaving the whole question of the relations between white and black in urban areas only half solved. Surely the principle of the Act, which, as the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) has said we all accepted, embodies as a basic principle, the treatment of the whole of the black population within towns as being subordinate to the interests, and desires, and aims of the white population which is there. If you are going to accept that, why not apply it gradually and piecemeal as may be required from time to time? It may even be susceptible of going very far into the political side of the relations between white and black. If you are going to have natives who are resident there only temporarily, and for the purposes of the whites, doing the work the white population wants them to do, and after having done that work they can go back to their territories, what is the object whether they should have the franchise in that place? I, for one, am entirely grateful and glad that this Bill has been brought before the House before we can engage in discussing the question of the franchise. Before you deal with that, you must have clearly in your own minds—far better still if it is laid down in an Act of Parliament—the broad lines of the economic relations which are to prevail between white and black. If you lay down the lines of the economic relations, the political lines will follow naturally. The political may be rendered entirely unnecessary by the economic. [Time limit extended.] I am deeply grateful to the courtesy of the Minister and the House for the indulgence which has been given to me. I would just like to take another aspect, because I should be sorry to think I had forgotten and overlooked it. I would have been very sorry if it was thought that I adopted an attitude of plunder to the natives of South Africa, to deny their rights, to keep them down, or to prevent their development, I repudiate that entirely—it is impossible to do justice to the black without doing justice to the white; and impossible to do justice to the white without doing justice to the black. I believe that the scheme which I have indicated, that the relationship which I have outlined, is not only best for the white races, but is also best for the black race. The degradation which has taken place amongst the blacks has been an outstanding feature of these dreadful urban relationships with which we have dealt, and which is deplored by the native race themselves. I believe that, granted adequate means of living in their reserves, in extended reserves, if necessary, the native race will welcome the lines of division with which the principles of this Bill are concerned. We have wrought a very great injury indeed on the native races by pitching them, willy nilly, into this vortex of twentieth century civilization, and many of them have gone down, and others are going down. The natives need protection. They need separation in their own interests just as much as we do, and I believe that the destruction of their tribal system, of the socialistic, shall I call it, basis upon which the tribes have been organized, the breaking-up of their traditions and of their family life, is but very poorly paid for by the example which they see in the relations of the white man and the white woman in the white man’s town. I hope the Minister will give consideration to the alterations which I have suggested.

I have listened with great interest to the speaker, and I think it is clear to all of us that he has carefully studied the matter. If we tackle the matter in the spirit of his remarks, then I feel we shall make a success of it. I have a good deal to do with natives, and think the streaming of natives into towns is wrong. It is not in the interest of the natives. I agree with the Minister of Lands, and older natives have often complained to me that they have no control over their children when they go to the towns. It is, therefore, in the interests of the natives that something should be done, because we all feel that the large towns are the factories of dissatisfaction; they there learn things they never knew, and they sow bad seed when they return home. It has been said that the natives receive too low wages on the farms. I know that in the towns they get a little more, but I also know that when they come back home in six months they come back with empty hands and have not a sou. That is the grievance of the older and the sensible native. I respect the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) very much, but I must honestly say that his speech here this afternoon was unfortunate and deplorable.

Why?

I want to ask the hon. member whether he is convinced that the speech will have a calming effect on the minds of the natives, and might directly cause upheaval? Does he not fear that what be said will fall on fruitful ground insofar as the agitation is concerned? His speech so well suits the agitator, and the Kadalie kind of man—to give it that name—that they will talk of a new friend in the second leader of the South African Party. The hon. member is a very responsible person in this House, and at a time when feelings are so excited he gets up in this House and says that the natives are oppressed. Where? In what legislation? How can he use such expressions that will stir up the natives?

I said they were under the impression that they were being oppressed.

Yes, and you fortify the impression. The hon. member further said that the natives cannot be governed by force: but is that taking place? The hon. member does endless harm by such speeches.

I spoke the truth.

That is what the agitator says, but you are showing no service to white South Africa. The hon. member said that the natives are not getting proper representation: what then does he want? Let him state clearly what representation he desires in this Parliament. Does he not see that with his imputation he is making bad blood and stirring up the feelings of the natives? The hon. member is silent, and cannot answer my question. The time has come for the white population to stand together to do justice to Europeans and natives. Where did injustice exist?

I cannot speak again.

I will sit down if the hon. member will say where they have been governed by force, and where an injustice has been done them.

I shall—

I cannot permit the hon. member to speak again.

The hon. member is doing much harm by such a speech.

I did not say that the natives were suffering from oppression. I left that question entirely on one side. What I said was that there was a widespread feeling among the native people that their interests are not properly looked after, and that that is why they should be allowed to give evidence before a select committee. The hon. member has wilfully, or unwittingly, misrepresented me.

Such statements we know create the impression among natives that an injustice is being done. The hon. member further said that natives cannot be governed by force.

Yes.

What do you mean by that? Where did it take place? It is disappointing to find an hon. member on that side of the House making such a speech at this time of day.

I think the last speaker is suffering from what can be fairly described as a 1929 election complex. He has at the back of his mind the shadow of some mysterious calamity that he fears to share with the House. It has been said by the hon. member for Yeoville that there should be an opportunity given to the natives themselves to give evidence and represent their point of view. Does the hon. gentleman think that there is something wrong about this? The more I listen to speeches of that kind the more I see that fuller opportunities should be given to learn and consider the views of the natives themselves, and the more remarks of this kind demonstrate that need. The speech made by the hon. member for Roodepoort (Col. Stallard) took me completely by surprise. I do not remember that he has at any previous time developed the theory that he now brings forward. The logical outcome of his argument is that more legislation should be introduced to provide for territorial segregation and industrial segregation, and he must proceed logically to argue that the industrial conscription of native labour would have to follow industrial segregation. The question before the House is, however, merely whether the Act of 1923 should be amended. The hon. member for Roodepoort (Col. Stallard) said that he thought the fundamental principle of the legislation of 1923 was based on this that the presence of natives in urban areas should be permitted only so far as they subserved European interests. That is not the avowed purpose of the Act. It was an act to provide for improved conditions of native housing and generally better conditions for the natives in such areas. How the hon. member can say that in 1923 the House committed itself to such a far-reaching principle as this I cannot understand. The purpose of the Bill as I see it is to provide for certain practical improvements in administration in a city such as this and throughout the country generally. In the speech of the hon. Minister, I am sorry to say I felt there was an absence of any indication that in drafting this Bill and in introducing it he had any sympathetic regard at all for the natives themselves. I listened also to the remarks of the hon. Minister of Lands, and it seemed to me the chief aim he had in view was merely to provide cheaper labour for the farmers. I hope this is not the spirit in which the hon. Minister has introduced the Bill. There is no reason why the view of the natives should not be ascertained. He told us that the Native Affairs Commission had been sent to different parts of the country to collect information for the purpose of framing the Bill, but I have not seen their report, and it has not been laid upon the table of this House. So far as the Minister is concerned he left us entirely in the dark as to the nature of native opinion on the working of this Act. I notice that during the recess he has been touring the country and holding meetings, if not in the native territories very near them. We would have liked to hear the views of natives regarding this Bill. I suggest an opportunity should be given to witnesses to appear before the Native Affairs Committee of this House to state their opinion. The discussion seems to have been largely confined, Certainly on the other side of the House, to territorial segregation, industrial segregation and the provision of cheap labour, but the object of the Act is to provide for improved conditions of natives in urban areas. Coming to the practical administration of the Bill, there are one or two pointe to which I would draw the hon. Minister’s attention. Speaking of the mere machinery of the Bill, I should like to ask whether the Minister has had the advantage of consulting with his departmental advisers and whether he has learned their opinion in reference to the necessity of the repeated references to the administrator that the principal Act calls for. The Act repeatedly provides—the phrase occurs more than once—that questions being dealt with should be referred to the administrator of the province concerned. In my opinion this is a brake upon progress. The Minister knows that in practice the Native Affairs Department in its last resort regulates the matter, having regard to the interests of the local authorities. The Minister should tell us whether the present practice of referring matters from time to time to the provincial administrations concerned has not involved delay and the introduction of matters irrelevant to those to be dealt with. I cannot see any reason to refer matters to the administrators of any province except on the point as to how far the local authority may be acting within its powers. The Act otherwise provides clearly the duties that are expected of local authorities, and if it is thought they might exceed their powers, the Native Affairs Department is there to decide the question. The whole of the power that local authorities have for the regulation of natives within their areas is derived from the legislation already in force. Touching upon the Bill, I trust the Minister will devise some amendment of the existing procedure for the passing of regulations. In one respect the Native Affairs Department bear a close affinity to the Labour Department. Many of the proclamations and regulations issued by it have been declared ultra vires and most important and unexpected consequences have resulted from their inability or refusal or neglect to observe the provisions of the law. Perhaps that will be cured under the administration of the present Minister. Still, coming back to the machinery embodied in the Act, I suggest to him that the procedure in regard to the making of regulations is altogether unnecessary and cumbersome. It frequently involves months of delay and, in some cases, loss of a considerable amount of revenue to the local authorities. A case has occurred not 100 miles from Cape Town where, owing to the lateness of the promulgation of regulations, considerable difficulties were experienced arising from the fact that the procedure in the Bill and the machinery devised for the ordinary promulgation of regulations by a local authority, is quite unnecessarily complex. If a regulation were adopted by a resolution of the council, promulgated in the Gazette, after approval by the department, and published in one or more native languages in the particular locations concerned, you would have sufficient notification for all practical purposes and of any regulations. I commend that to the Minister as a point which has actually arisen in the administration of the Bill. I hope he will see eye to eye with me, and its consideration might serve as an additional reason for this matter going before a select committee. The matter could be investigated by the calling of competent witnesses who spend their lives in administering the Act in a practical manner. There is another feature lacking in this Bill. Is any real endeavour made, from the point of view of the native, to deal with the position which will arise when the Act, as amended, is in full operation? The Minister proposes to take power to declare a particular municipal area to be a closed area to the native. When the native arrives at the boundary of that area, which a week before may have been proclaimed a prohibited or closed area, if he enters it he is liable to imprisonment. He is liable to summary arrest, imprisonment and deportation from that area. Then when he is in that area and his employment may have ceased, he is also liable to be summarily deported, after due enquiry, for being a person habitually unemployed. I am not here to argue that this power should not be given to to do this, but it seems to me that it approaches very closely to conscription of native labour; certainly it is a drastic regulation of native labour. It is the duty of the Minister to see that steps are taken to make the position easier for the native I put this point to the Minister. Suppose he issues a proclamation in regard to the city of Cape Town and it becomes a closed area. That proclamation is unknown to the vast majority of natives in the country. They board trains at various stations in the country and come to Cape Town where they cannot obtain employment. So far as I know, no attempt is made to Keep in touch with the native areas from which labour is drawn in order to give them information as to the places in the country where they can find employment. If the Minister takes to himself these drastic powers, there should be some effort made to establish a labour exchange so that the natives may learn, before they leave their homes, how far there may be employment available in particular towns. That does not involve much expense. The Government could secure the cooperation of the magistrates and native commissioners, and could also have the co-operation of the railway administration, which would go a long way towards making this information available. The matter may be fraught with great misunderstanding on account of inability of the native to understand these new provisions. Those natives travel hundreds of miles, at great expense to themselves, and then find that by an arbitrary law they, because they have entered a town searching for work, are to be arrested and deported. How utterly impossible will it be for such a measure to be understood by the type of person with whom we are dealing. I ask the Minister to see if some scheme cannot be worked out to avoid the hardship of such a system, and to approach the matter with a more sympathetic spirit. I venture to support the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) when I say that, at the present time, there is a ferment of dissatisfaction amongst the natives of South Africa for reasons which we need not discuss now It is dissatisfaction which takes the form of questioning how far the white man is administering the law in the natives’ interests, as the natives are asked to believe he has done in the past. I also feel the necessity in the three or four larger towns of South Africa concerned for the appointment of a native welfare officer. I remember that in the old days in the Cape Province, we had a Protector of Natives at Kimberley. Amongst his functions was this: he was there to see that the natives pouring into Kimberley, and taking work on the mines and elsewhere, were not exploited or denied their rights. We should have some officer who would fairly advise the natives what their rights are and would protect them in asserting them. At the present moment, in the administration of these large native locations, we have a superintendent. He is regarded by the natives as the representative of the local authority concerned. You have an advisory board whose function it is to meet and discuss matters and determine minor questions of policy. They do not enquire into individual grievances. I am not suggesting the appointment of men to exploit or develop grievances. One cannot help feeling, especially when you see the administration of justice in the larger towns, that there are many ways in which the native rights are denied or trampled on, whether through ignorance or carelessness or through lack of sympathy. I do feel that there should go hand in hand with the establishment of locations, the appointment of a native welfare officer who would, in the first instance, be a European. He should be a man with special experience and knowledge, and, if possible, a retired magistrate with experience of native administration. That is the kind of man I have in mind, a man who has a real knowledge of native administration and is capable of dealing with the natives, can command their confidence and will smoothe out those difficulties which occur in the practical administration of the law. There is one further point I want to refer to, confining myself entirely to the administration of the Act, without rising or descending to those spheres of thought which were touched upon by the hon. member for Roodepoort (Col. Stallard). I notice that, in dealing with this procedure for securing the exclusion of idle and disorderly persons, the right of recourse to the higher courts is now to be given. I am very glad to see that. I dare say the Minister has inserted it because the highest court in the land has drawn attention to the fact that a native has no power to have a case of this kind brought before the court, except perhaps where there has been a violation of natural justice. I should like to see the Bill amended to make it clear that in every case where an order is made, it should automatically be reviewed by a judge. The records should be sent to a judge and the sentence should not be executed until a certificate has been given by a judge that it is in accordance with real and substantial justice. Does the House realize the extraordinary powers conferred in this section of this Bill, namely, a police constable finding a native out of employment may arrest him, hale him before a magistrate and then the onus is cast on the native of showing why he should not be treated as an idle and disorderly person and sent out of the confines of the local authority. It will be very difficult for the average native, quite unacquainted with his legal rights, to rebut such a charge. Other points, no doubt, also require attention. I understand the Minister desires to improve the machinery under the Act. I should be glad to hear from the Minister when he replies that the purpose of the Bill is contained in the long title of the original Act and that it is intended only by this amending Bill to improve the conditions of residence of natives in our larger towns. If the Minister desires to secure co-operation in the administration of the Bill, he should yield to the request made by the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan), and give an opportunity to the Native Affairs Committee to hear any evidence that may be submitted to it. The House should be in a position to know how the original Act is being administered from the native point of view. The Minister will forgive me if I remind him that in the high position he now occupies, the native is entitled to look to him to have regard to his interests as well as the interests of people who require cheap labour, and of those who speak of the exploitation of the native, and urge that the native should be allowed to go to the larger towns only as long as he is subservient to the white population. I earnestly beg the Minister to give those who may wish to state their views on the Bill the fullest opportunity of doing so before the select committee.

I welcome the Bill. A good deal of extraneous matter has been introduced into this debate—extraneous in this way, as hearing more on the results of natives returning to a native area. With most of these extraneous views I largely disagree. When I hear that there is fierce competition between white and black, because natives are coming in greater numbers to urban areas, I am inclined to give the statement a flat contradiction. The actual increase of natives in urban areas does not affect white employment. It was also suggested that conditions under the Act were being made too good, and that consequently natives would demand higher wages. But he will demand better pay in any case, and we should remind ourselves how we have made it impossible for the native to live in the urban areas on the wages that satisfied him a year or two ago, as we have made everything he uses very much dearer as the result of increased customs duties. We have heard a great deal about segregation, and it would seem as if every politician has his own pet scheme of segregation. I wish, however, to consider the effects of the Act of 1923 on the urban areas and the effect it is having on the native, and also how the Act has been carried out. I believe that in all our native legislation the native should be the primary consideration, and that was the case in the Act of 1923. Since that Act was passed, however, a great deal of progress has been made, and to-day in most of the large centres, the municipalities have carried out the Act in a creditable manner and the native is probably more highly appreciative of the change of living and housing conditions than the House realizes. We can appreciate better the great effort made and the great task undertaken by municipalities under this Act, both financially and otherwise, when we realize the number of natives provided for in these larger urban areas. It is rather marvellous that in Johannesburg we have 70,000 natives, Bloemfontein about 26,000, Port Elizabeth about 20,000 and East London somewhere in the neighbourhood of 18,000. I notice in the evidence of the Johannesburg deputation to the select committee they said that not only is it the amount of money they have spent, and the work done, but there is an annual loss of £15,000 to the Johannesburg municipality. One of the representatives stated that the municipality stands the loss, and that employers get labour at a cheaper rate. After all, the municipality and employers are all taxpayers, and it comes to practically the same thing, so that if some of the extra money of the taxpayer is expended to carry out this excellent Act, he is getting it back in another way. I approve, and I believe the House will do so, of the liberal policy being adopted in connection with the administration of this Act. I say, also, and I think perhaps the Minister may give a little reflection to it, that as hostels proceed and buildings are put up the Government money runs out, and unless municipalities are prepared to take their own money and tax the ratepayers, the whole scheme must disappear and finish. It is pleasant to observe that the municipalities, and I think it ought to be stated to their credit, have not permitted that to take place. Any shortcomings there are are on the part of the Government, or of the Minister of this particular department. The local authorities have come to the rescue to provide the money necessary for the erection of these hostels. I think one might make the suggestion that when an Act of this character imposes so much on a local authority, which is a real hardship in many cases, the least this particular department concerned should see is that the capital is available when it is wanted, and if the Minister would note that for the future it would be a very good thing. From the figures I have here, the Johannesburg municipality got only £300,000 or £400,000, and have spent half of that amount—of the taxpayers’ money—in addition to the Government loan, and while there is a strong desire to see this Act carried out we do think it would be a pity if we should fail to go on with the work because the Government fails to provide the money required. With regard to the amendments which this Bill proposes to make, the first amendment is with reference to giving permission to an employer to accommodate on his premises a certain number of natives, 25 or more. The matter was apparently overlooked in the principal Act. I am glad they shall be subject to the local authority and that those premises will be subject in future both to inspection and regulation. This will ensure that those natives who are outside hostels will not have their rights abused. Provision is made for domestic servants, and the suggestion has come that further exemption would be desirable, and that in the large buildings and warehouses there should be provision for proper native quarters passed and approved of by the local authorities—the health officers of the municipality. It is pointed out that there is no better way of preventing burglaries than making provision of this kind, and the natives will be a considerable security. I hope the Minister will agree to something of this character. We have heard a good deal about the crowds of natives coming in, and of redundant natives. The trouble is not the natives coming in. I believe the cause of the apparent trouble is not the natives coming in but the local authorities not being able to proceed rapidly with their schemes of hostels, and consequently the number of natives coming in seem to be far greater than they actually were. The trouble is the natives going out. As to Section 6, which amends Section 17 of the Act of 1923, I find there is very little difference between the amendment and the original Act. I think the original Act was better, because it provided that certain native men and women should be returned, which suggests that there is some place to return to. I think it is for the House to say, and to ask the Minister what provision is going to be made; where are these people going to? If you turn these natives out they must go somewhere If they go to Roodepoort they are not admitted, and if they go to Germiston they are not admitted there. Where are these people to go ?

That provision remains.

Then you have the detribalized natives. That provision does not cover them. I see from the evidence given before the select committee that there are some thousands of them. You cannot send them anywhere but on the veld, and they will eventually arrive at the farms. Unless some provision is made in this Bill they will be turned out of the urban areas and the question is where can they go. A farm colony is foreshadowed, and it is apparent that the idea is that these natives should go to this farm colony. If it is near Pretoria, as I have heard, then it will only take two or three hundred natives. In that case it will be perfectly useless, because any of our large towns would give you three or four or five times more than this farm colony will take. There must be some provision. We may be as good as gold to the natives inside the urban areas, but a certain number will be turned out, and here will come the real hardship. The amendments to the Act are not complete without some such provision, and I believe the amendments will prove excellent if this provision is made. With regard to clause 10, amending section 22 of the principal Act, here certain powers are given to local authorities to regulate trading and hawking and so forth. The clause provides that no site shall be let to other than a native. Trading is not the native’s forte. It is not a position he is likely to desire, or that he would be able to fill satisfactorily. The amendment provides that failing this the local authority shall fill this position, and shall become butchers and bakers and eating-house keepers and various other things. If you are going to do real harm generally to the natives you will put these powers in the hands of the local authority, the powers with regard to trading. One is asked for a solution. There is a certain class of white trader, perfectly reliable, engaged in native trading. While I would not say tor a moment that we should do away with the native trading idea in favour of local authorities trading and supplying the wants of the natives in these large hostels, which will become larger, I would look around for white men. I now come to a vital and extraordinary clause which provides for the burning down of houses. It is provided that where vermin are found in a house the native must be removed, and the house must be burnt. The clause takes away the power from the local authority entirely. The local authority is unable to say that the house can be cleansed or made sanitary. The amendment reads that the house shall be burnt.

Read the Section.

I have read it several times, and I think I am right. In any case the power is taken away from the local authority, and where work of this kind is to be done the largest possible powers should be given to the local authority. Speaking generally, I think it is the wide powers granted to the local authorities that have caused the Act to be so successful. I would like to see the Bill go to a select committee. With regard to the amendments generally I support the Bill, and I believe it is very welcome to this House. I hope that after being amended in Committee the measure will strengthen the original Act which has been so well carried out by the local authorities.

A good deal of extraneous mater has been introduced during the course of this debate and I do not wish to go over it again. It is only a matter of amendment of a very fine Act. The hon. member who has just spoken on the subject has spoken from the point of view of the larger centres— the industrial and mining areas. I have no practical experience of those areas, but I can speak from the point of view of the municipal locations of the Cape Province which existed for many years before the 1923 Act. In the Eastern Province where Europeans were living their servants consisted of natives who had come from the Transkei. The location was primarily intended for the servants of the residents in the township or village. These locations were governed by regulations which were framed under very limited powers which the municipalities then had. It was generally admitted that the housing conditions in most of these municipal locations were deplorable. They were in some cases a standing disgrace. As time went on there was a tendency to attract other natives than domestic servants to these locations, and one of the great causes of this in the Eastern Province was the abolition of the private locations in the rural areas.

Farmers were not allowed to keep any natives on their land, unless permanently employed, with the result that a number of detribalised natives had to find room; to seek employment, or some place of residence. A large number of these were absorbed by the farmers themselves, but unfortunately large numbers found their way into these municipal locations. There was no employment for them, and unfortunately, when there is no employment they have to resort to some other means of earning a livelihood. Then troubles began with illicit brewing of kaffir beer. The position became intolerable and municipalities in the Eastern Province sought greater powers to control the influx of these natives and all the evils attendant on the brewing of kaffir beer. Parliament was approached and as a result of representation made by certain mayors of the Eastern Province, accompanied by native representatives to the then Prime Minister this parent Act came into force. This was a tremendous step to take, under the conditions which then prevailed, because it embodied four very important principles which became crystallised in legislation and have been accepted throughout the country. The first principle was that of segregation. That was accepted not only by political authorities but by the natives as being in their best interests. The enlightened natives appreciated this opportunity of developing on their own lines. That principle of segregation is a corner-stone of the 1923 parent Act. It gave exemption to the Registered Owner, Registered Voter and Minister of Religion with their families to continue to reside in the European area. It further provided another important principle and I point that out because in that measure and in the present measure there is nothing of repressive legislation so far as the native is concerned. If the legislation asked for now is passed, the condition of the enlightened and respectable natives will be improved. The second corner-stone in that parent Act was that all monies raised by natives in a location should be spent on themselves, after deducting administrative expenses. The municipality could not see it to augment their funds. It gave to the natives sole trading rights in that particular area. The third principle, which has worked well, gave to the native a measure of self-government. It was not a full measure, but the natives, through their advisory boards, were given some say in the government of their areas. That was a big experiment, far bigger than most hon. members realise, and to-day these advisory boards even have native policemen watching them in the shape of vigilance committees. These powers proved very useful in the administration of this Act and which I was pleased to hear the hon. the Minister acknowledge. If we treat the native fairly, good results may be expected. Hasten slowly. Carry the native along with you, make use of the services of the advisory boards and there is going to be very little trouble in the administration of this Act. Members of the advisory boards are usually selected by the inhabitants from amongst themselves of men who have their full confidence, and more use should be made of these advisory boards in every possible way. I will refer to one or two sections of the Act where I think these advisory boards could be used more advantageously. Great advances have been made in the housing conditions as a result of this Act. I specially mention Bloemfontein at which the first suitable housing scheme for natives in locations came into operation. It has been an example to other municipalities. But when I quote these figures I am going to appeal to the Minister just to turn the screw a little bit on some of the smaller municipal locations where the housing conditions are very far from what they should be. I leave it at that, but I think that a considerable amount of improvement in the direction of the housing of the natives in the small municipalities might well take place. After all they are serving the white community in our homes. They contract all sorts of diseases unless they are housed under hygienic conditions, and as we are naturally anxious that they should be raised there should be some incentive for them to advance and take a pride in their own little homes in the municipal locations. I believe it is a great force to assist to uplift any people to be housed under the best possible conditions. We have heard a good deal of the undesirables in these larger municipalities. They are very anxious to get rid of them from their industrial and mining areas, but where do they drive them to? Go and look at our little municipal locations. That is where they drift to. All those bad characters and prostitutes are working their way into our small municipal locations. Only a few weeks ago my own little municipality, when taking a census of the population, had to get rid of no less than 200 women with no husbands, who were living on the proceeds of selling kaffir beer. We had to get rid of them. That is what is happening. You are turning them out of the bigger centres and driving them into the small centres. I feel that the Bill does not make sufficient provision to deal with that aspect of the problem. We are driving them from one spot to another an, unfortunately, we are driving them to smaller municipalities. I want to deal with one or two of the clauses which I think are unnecessarily severe. I refer particularly on page 4 to Clause 6 where no native may enter an urban area for the purpose of seeking or undertaking employment or residing therein. I put the question to myself: Is this fair? It may be a matter of opinion whether it is fair or not, but I put the rule to myself, and I say that the only standard upon which I can judge whether it is fair or not, is to apply the principle of the golden rule, never to do to another, except under similar circumstances, that which you would have them do unto you. I feel that the Minister would never give that power to a municipality no matter how many Europeans there may be there, to prohibit another white man going into that municipality to seek work. They could never give the municipality the power to prevent a European going into that municipality. It would not be fair, and I maintain that that is not right. If we give that privilege to the white man to go into a European municipality to look for work, when there is a considerable amount of unemployment, it is not fair to the native, the good, honest native, who goes there with good, honest intentions to seek work, to allow a municipality, without any appeal, so far as the native is concerned, to prevent him going to the location for an honest purpose. I was astounded at the impression which the hon. member for Roodepoort (Col. Stallard) got when he visited the Transkei. He admits that it was only a casual visit. That reminds me of the visitors to South Africa who land at Cape Town, entrain for Johannesburg and immediately afterwards write a book on all the problems of South Africa. The very fact that large numbers of these natives are going to work on the mines and elsewhere shows that they are driven out by starvation and economic causes. They are not looking for money. So long as there is money or mealies enough in the Transkei it is most difficult to get them to come out to work. Our own farmers adjoining the native territory find that when a mealie season is particularly good, they cannot get the natives to come out and work. Why? The last shearing season a farmer sent across in order to get boys to shear his sheep. There was plenty of food. The reply came back that as soon as master had finished his shearing he could come and shear the natives’ sheep. There is a considerable over-population in the Transkei area. There is another provision in this Bill which I think should be amended in committee. It is one which may easily lead to a considerable amount of friction between municipalities. I refer to the powers of absorbing land by one municipality from another municipality. I can understand that if that particular ground is adjacent or contiguous to the municipality, there will not be any great hardship. But I can conceive of several cases where by its powers of expropriation a municipality can go right into the area of another municipality, and expropriate land there for the location which it does not want at its immediate doors, and there may be considerable hardship imposed on the other municipality. It may have still more serious consequences. It may seriously deflate the prices of European property in the vicinity of the spot where the municipality is going to establish a location. I do feel that the Minister should make some provision that unless such ground is adjacent or contiguous to the boundary of the municipality requiring it, some safeguard should be granted to the other municipality. The question of the demolition of buildings has been referred to, but I do not wish to labour the point. But I think in this rase the Minister should make some provision for consultation of the advisory board in the case of the proposed demolition of native buildings. Then, if the white man as he will regard it burns or destroys his hut, the native will feel that there is an advisory board watching his interests and he can be heard. Invariably, before destruction takes place, the medical officer or some other officials go along to the location and the native is told that his hut must be burnt down. The native immediately feels that that is an act of injustice towards him. I feel that if he were allowed under such circumstances to say that the advisory board should be consulted, not necessarily that their opinion should be acted upon, but consulted when they were destroying such buildings, which, after all, is the native’s possession, and although it may not be very valuable, it is valuable to him, in those circumstances, if the Minister will accept something in the nature of an advisory board to be consulted before actual destruction of buildings takes place, it would be considerable help in the administration of the provisions of this Act. In view of the fact that the natives had no opportunity of giving evidence before the select committee which considered the original Act and that the principle of advisory boards has been accepted in the parent Act I appeal to the Minister to agree to the Bill being referred to a select committee. I was present at the meeting which the Minister had with the natives of King William’s Town, and the Minister from his experience of the natives knows that where they are concerned we have to go slowly. The natives look upon the Minister as their father and adviser; in fact the natives in the Eastern Province ask “what is the white man doing in regard to our affairs?” and in these matters they do not look upon Europeans as being divided into political parties. Great respect was shown to the Minister at King William’s Town by the natives, whose confidence he won by his wonderful patience in listening to their little grievances. If the Minister will give the natives an opportunity of being heard by the select committee it will still further increase the amount of confidence the natives have in him. Certain resolutions by natives appeared in this morning’s paper; they may seem to be of very little consequence from the European point of view, but they mean something to the natives. The curfew has been observed by the natives in the Eastern Province, and they do not regard it as a hardship. The European is absolutely prohibited from being in a native location between sunset and sunrise, so that in this respect equal treatment is meted out to both whites and blacks. Now, however, a big fuss is being made by the natives over the curfew, and the pity of it is that little things like this become magnified, and are seized upon by political agitators with the object of causing disaffection. Do not let us give the agitators any further opportunities. I believe the native is law-abiding; he has a wonderful sense of justice, and if he breaks the law he is prepared to pay the penalty, but all the same he resents anything in the nature of injustice. The Bill affects the native very widely. Let us carry him with us by winning his confidence, and then the Minister will find a large number of natives who will support any progressive native legislation such as the Bill before the House which I most heartily support.

After listening to the speeches of the hon. members opposite, I have decided that it is never too late to be converted. The hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (North) (Mr. Deane) has convinced me of it. His speech has shown me that he well appreciates what is good for the native, and for the European at the same time. In the north of course we give more attention to what they need. They have enough land, and it is not necessary for them to stream into the villages. But what I regret is that the Opposition speak with two voices about this matter. The hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) stated here that we could no longer govern the native with tear bombs. The hon. member for Heilbron (Mr. M. L. Malan) has made clear to him what the result of his speech will be, and I agree with that hon. member. I should like to see the hon. member for Yeoville going to the bottom of Adderley Street and remaining to see the effect of the speech he has just made. It will begin in Cape Town on Sunday, and it will soon spread to the north. The hon. member for Cape Town (Gardens) (Mr. Coulter) agrees with everything said by the hon. member for Yeoville, and he says the hon. member for Heilbron is suffering from the 1929 election complex. He is also suffering from it. The hon. member for Heilbron said during his election campaign that he stood for a white South Africa, and he has confirmed that in this House. The hon. member for Cape Town (Gardens), who has many natives in his constituency, said on his election platform that he would look after the interests of his electors, and he has kept his word to-day. He is therefore in the same position. But we have heard here to-day people speak with two voices, and I want to bring it to the notice of hon. members for the Transvaal. They want to remember the words used in this House to-day when they hold meetings in the Transvaal. I welcome the Bill and hope it will be passed.

This Bill purports to be an amendment of the social segregation policy introduced by the Act of 1923, which has now been administered for a matter of five or six years, and the local requirements of each particular area have proved that in certain respects, to meet the particular exingencies of municipalities lying as far remote as Durban and Cape Town, some amendments of the Act are required in so far as it affects their own local administration. The Minister who introduced this Bill went in no great detail into the proposed amendments, but at sufficient length to establish the fact that the amendments introduced in this Bill in general terms are desirable to meet the particular conditions which pertain in those areas. It may be that the manner in which the amendments have been formulated have given rise to a certain amount of suspicion that every local authority would probably require to put those wider powers into practical effect. That is the reason why certain of these amendments are objected to. There is nobody in this House who objects to the fundamental policies enunciated in the original Act, and I don’t think there is anybody in this House, or amongst serious native opinion, who would object to local authorities receiving powers for the purpose of strengthening the administration of the fundamental policies and principles enunciated in the original Bill, but it is these amendments laid down in much too wide terms which have agitated responsible native opinion, and native opinion which it is essential that we should recognize and carry with us. The hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) invited the Minister in charge of the Bill to allow these amendments, which are wider than those originally introduced in the Bill of last session, to go to a select committee, so that full advantage could be taken of hearing native opinion. This legislation is designed with at two-fold purpose, and the two-fold purpose is to give effect to the social segregation of natives and Europeans, and, at the same time, to afford excellent facilities and opportunities to the local authorities for the clearing up of slum areas. Those two principles are interwoven, but they may in a measure impose restrictions upon a certain section of the community. Last session was a short session, and one could have understood it if the Minister had not agreed to refer the Bill of last session to a select committee, because of the lack of time; but he did in fact submit the Bill to a select committee, and the select committee had sufficient time to hear the evidence. Now an opportunity is asked for a select committee to receive and consider such opposition, or such opinions, not necessarily opposition, which the natives propose to submit. I would add my persuasion to that of the hon. member to ask, surely it is an advantage when legislating for and on behalf of natives to appreciate what is the native opinion. If, in addition to appreciating his view of these amendments, we can make him appreciate the attitude of mind with which we view the same amendments, we are making a great stride forward. We are showing the educated responsible native, who has a far greater influence with the body of native opinion than the agitator has, what we think. If we carry the educated native opinion along with us, we are doing something of which this Assembly will have reason to be proud. If one is unable to accept the point of view of the native representatives we have done no harm, but a lot of good. The native will see we do not merely apply restrictive legislation without an opportunity being given him to state his views. I suggest that a select committee be constituted and native opinion be given this opportunity. There are certain principles introduced into this Bill which go rather further than the principles laid in the original Act. The suggestion that local authorities shall be afforded an opportunity of controlling and regulating the influx of natives into urban areas is a principle which offers on the face of it no great cause for alarm, but when one sees how it is possible for this principle to be misinterpreted by responsible members of this House, one does not feel surprised that native opinion should be somewhat exaggerated. This principle should be limited in its effect. At present every local authority can introduce regulations which may conflict with those of other authorities all over the Union. The Cape Town municipality may introduce regulations which differ from those introduced in Johannesburg or Durban or Port Elizabeth or East London. We should have all sorts of regulations by local authorities each dealing with it in a totally different way. This is a principle which does not conflict with the original principles laid down in 1923. There are other amendments to the Act with which one would have a better opportunity of dealing in committee than at a second reading. Certain amendments are suggested; one is that natives who, having resided in a proclaimed area, or within a local authority, when once having been served with a summons to vacate the abode he is occupying, may not reside within the whole of the local area, irrespective of whether it is a proclaimed area or not. Certain hon. members have suggested that local authorities have expended large sums of money for the housing of natives in their area and are affording such excellent opportunities by providing, at great expense to local taxpayers, decent housing conditions, and they are thereby inducing natives to go there, for natives are coming from all parts of the Union to derive the benefit of those so-called improved housing conditions. That is not the fact. That is not the reason for the introduction of this amendment. It is because, despite the fact that local authorities have put up houses and improved conditions which ought to attract the native, the moment the area or portion of an area of a local authority is proclaimed, the natives do not flock to the new conditions existing in the location. They run from one proclaimed area into another proclaimed area, and the whole premises upon which the argument has been based that the influx of natives is due to enhance and better conditions prescribed for the natives, falls away entirely in fact. The natives do not go to new locations, and they do not go to those new locations because the cost to the individual is very much more than he can economically afford. One would have to consider that aspect of the case. There are other local conditions dealing with exempted natives. There are natives exempted in certain local areas who are not exempted in other local areas in different provinces. The amendments to this Bill draw no distinction between the exempted native in one area and the exempted native in another area. Particularly I remind the Minister of the suggestion of the imposition of the curfew. I understand that that provision is introduced, and, judging from the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (North) (Mr. Deane), that provision has been introduced to benefit Durban.

Not Durban.

I think the hon. member mentioned Durban or Pietermaritzburg.

Newcastle.

No. It may be that that is so, and it may be that the local authorities outside the Garden Colony would not be prepared to introduce it; but, assuming that they did, I say it is a very strong card in the hands of local authorities to force the natives into the new locations. The curfew shall be rung at a particular hour and all natives resident in the area of that particular local authority will have to be indoors by that particular hour. That clause makes no difference between any native as such, no exempted native.

He can get a pass from his employer.

To suggest that, one would assume that in every local authority every native is employed by someone.

He should be.

I do not doubt he should be. I have heard the Minister of Mines and Industries voice his own opinions in regard to the movement of natives, but I would remind him that there are certain natives in the Cape Province who are employers of labour. They themselves employ labour, yet no difference is drawn between the exempted native and the unexempted native, and it is quite possible that a local authority seeing in the introduction of a curfew regulation an excellent way of sending natives out of the local authorities’ area, would impose, and I am very much afraid that the local authorities being what they are— and I do not blame them, for they are merely concerned with the interests of their own particular area—would impose such regulations. I shall not suggest that the local authority dealing with this question of slums would not feel inclined to impose this restricted curfew measure to deal with this particular thing.

On the motion of Mr. Bowen the debate was adjourned; to be resumed on 3rd February.