as chairman, brought up the report of the Select Committee on the Architects and Quantity Surveyors (Private) Bill, reporting the Bill with amendments, and specially with an alteration to the preamble, in accordance with leave granted by the House on 31st March, 1926.

Report and evidence to be printed ; Bill to be read a second time on 19th May.

I move as an unopposed motion that the amendments be considered now.

I object. We have not seen the amendments.

May I inform members, so as to disarm their adverse criticism, that there is no material alteration in the Bill. It is only in the Dutch version.

Amendments to be considered on 14th May.

I move—

My reason for moving this is because, as I surmise, the whole of to-morrow (Wednesday) will be occupied with the adjourned debate at the joint sitting. Thursday is Ascension Day, and we do not usually sit on that day, hence my motion.

seconded.

A few days ago the Prime Minister moved with regard to the rules which should apply to the debates regarding the joint sitting that any Minister could move at the beginning of a sitting an alteration in the hours of the sitting. I then asked if the Prime Minister would enlighten the House as to the reason of that particular motion. He is generally very polite, but he refused any information, and I do think that on that occasion he might have taken the House into his confidence. Now we see what it is.

You have found it out?

No, the Prime Minister has let it out. He must have had it in contemplation at the time.

He has not moved it, but moved that we do not sit.

I notice when a speech is made in Dutch the Minister of Defence is most intent, and I was under the impression that he understood it, but now I do not think he has taken it all in. I think the Prime Minister should now confess that he ought to have taken the House into his confidence and have said that it was in order that the joint sitting might take place in the afternoon and evening. I have risen to protest. We have on the Order Paper here no fewer than 33 Orders standing over—most important matters—and the country is waiting for them. The Divorce Law Amendment Bill is now being shunted, as well as other important matters, and why should the work of the country which is embodied in these 33 matters, as well as many more, of which we may get notice, be postponed in order to push on this joint sitting? Motion put and agreed to.

I would like to ask the Minister what authority is referred to in the second line. I presume the “principal Act” is the Act of last year, and there is no reference there to an authority at all. In this connection I would like to suggest to the Minister the desirability of an amendment of the Licences Consolidation Act, which is practically bound up with the Provincial Subsidies Act, and if the Minister would take the townships and the municipalities of Natal into consideration and consult them, he would get information and put through a Bill, which would put the things which were left in such a muddle last year, into proper form.

I understand the object of this clause is for the municipality of Durban to refund certain moneys which they have collected under the principal Act. The municipalities are advised that they were acting within the law, and they consider that the Minister, in his remarks, has been rather unfair to them in charging them with acting illegally. They acted on legal advice, and the fact that it is necessary to bring forward an amending Bill is sufficient proof that the municipalities acted legally in the matter. The municipality of Durban has been considering the matter, and would like to lay representations before the committee—I do not say they want to give evidence at the bar of the House —but they want to inform the Government about this clause which they have not had time to do. I suggest that the Minister may well report progress and ask leave to sit again to give the municipality an opportunity of communicating with the Government and hon. members. No time will be lost—the Government has plenty of business on the order paper to go on with—and the public interest does not call for any great haste in this matter. Nobody would be prejudiced if the Bill is allowed to stand down for a few days. I know it is futile for me to move to report progress and ask leave to sit again, but I seriously ask the Minister to do so, and to go on with the next business.

I want to support what the hon. member for Dundee (Sir Thomas Watt) has just said. I pointed out before that this Bill had not had sufficient time to get to Durban for the people interested, and the Minister said he would put it off, but he has not put it off long enough. The Town Council of Durban had a meeting yesterday to go into the clauses of the Bill and to consider what their effect would be. The result of that meeting would not be known for a day or two. I ask the Minister to put off the consideration of this Bill at least till Friday, so that the town council can put forward any points they consider necessary in connection with this Bill. The Minister is always so reasonable that I hope he will accede to this request.

When the second reading of the Bill was agreed to the hon. member who has just spoken (Mr. Henderson) pointed out that I might put down the committee stage at the end of the week, and I readily agreed at the time to put it down for Friday. It is Tuesday to-day, and there has been plenty of time for the Durban municipality to make representations. I have had a letter from it and hon. members have had letters. The matter is very simple—we are compelling the municipality to return licence duties which Parliament last year intended should go to the Provincial Council of Natal.

There are other points in the Bill.

No, this is the only point in which the municipality of Durban is concerned, I do not want to be unreasonable ; but they have had plenty of time. They knew the legislation that was being introduced and I have already put off the committee stage.

It takes at least three days to get letters from Durban to Cape Town ; so that it will be two or three days before we can get the result of the council meeting. It would be more satisfactory to all concerned if the Minister would put off the Bill until Friday. It would be considered a concession which would be appreciated by all concerned.

If it will expedite the passing of the Bill I will put it off till Friday.

On the motion of Mr. Henderson it was agreed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.

House Resumed :

Progress reported ; House to resume in committee on 14th May.

It would be inconvenient if I only put half the questions I wished to put. I was dealing with the position of the Board of Trade, and I was asking the Minister if he will tell us what changes have been made in the personnel of the board since last year, and whether any response has been made by him to the request made from this side last year, that some man of business experience should be put on that board, and that it should not be composed, as it was then, of gentlemen whose qualifications, however high, were in the main academic. While on this subject I want to deal with the board generally, and its policy. I take it that all the gentlemen who constitute that board have strongly protectionist leanings, and that is natural with a protectionist Government, but as far as one can see, the board view questions submitted to them only from one angle. As an illustration, take their report on ready-made clothing. They state that application has been made to them for protection ; they discuss the number of persons employed in that trade and then proceed to recommend protection to that trade. I find in their reports which recommend protection to these smaller industries, an entire absence of breadth of view. They do not seem to discuss, or even to be aware of, what repercussions their particular recommendations will have throughout the economic and industrial life of South Africa. For instance, they recommend an increase on ready-made clothing, knowing very well that such an increase would put up the price ; but they do not discuss how far that will have an effect in putting up the cost of living and raising the wage scale in other industries in South Africa. Could the Minister not ask the Board of Trade to make a general report on this question of protection, and how far it should be applied. I have no doubt the board does its best to hear the applications for protection which are made to it, in a critical spirit, but would it not be wise to put a red-hot free trader on the board as a sort of advocatus diaboli to put the other side and to see that proper enquiry is made into these applications Then there is the matter of the trades commissioners. I observe that the trades commissioner in London is called the trades commissioner, and he gets £1,000 a year, but when we come to the continent, he is called a commissioner of commerce, and gets £2,000 a year, and when we come to America, we again come back to the title of trades commissioner, with £2,000 a year. In Kenya he is a trades commissioner, at £750. What is the difference between a trades commissioner and a commissioner of commerce? And what principle is followed in assessing the salary? It seems curious to me that the trades commissioner in London is put in a separate vote under mines and industries ; while we have the high commissioner in London put in an entirely separate vote by himself, and accounted for in this House by the Minister of Finance.

As a result of representations by the South African Railways Publicity Department, the Government has decided to vote £10,000 to be spent in advertising overseas. The money is being used for publicity chiefly in the United States this year, where they are assisting the work now being done by the trade commissioner in advertising South African goods. The increase in the miners’ phthisis vote is accounted for principally by the existence of the Medical Appeal Board. Two members of this board were appointed by the Medical Bureau at a salary of £1,500 a year, together with a part-time chairman with a salary at the rate of £1,200 a year, and the board has a small staff. The Miners’ Phthisis Prevention Committee accounts for £2,000 of the increased vote of £8,000. Five hundred pounds is to be spent by re-instituting two scholarships to enable young South Africans to study industrial problems overseas. The board will make recommendations to the Minister as to the most suitable candidates, and applications for the scholarships close at the end of the month. The printing of a catalogue of scientific publications issued in the Union, which the Research Grant Board has asked for, will cost about £250. The catalogue has been prepared by the Royal Society of South Africa. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) has asked whether the Board of Trade will hold their sittings in public. Under the previous statutes, there was no direction that the board should do their work in public. Up to now, neither the previous nor the present board has held its sittings or done its work in public. I do not know that it is desirable that they should. It may be that, under exceptional circumstances, such procedure would be justified, but as a general rule it would not be desirable. I understand from the board that whenever a particular question is being enquired into there is immediately and almost automatically a conflict of views which are fully laid before the board. I will, however, take special steps that on every important question there must be a fair opportunity of hearing all sides of the question. But I quite agree that there must be a reasonable limit to the enquiry. The board advertises their intention to go into all important matters, and it is open to the public to offer evidence. Another objection to public sittings would be a controversy in the public press, and the proceedings would be lengthened unduly. So far as I am concerned, I will always encourage the board to hear both sides of a question so far as reasonably practicable. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) has asked about the increases in the votes for the trade commissioners. The votes for the trades commissioners in America and on the continent are simply tentative. I have no objection to these officials calling themselves trade commissioners or commissioners of commence. What is there in a name, after all?

The salary fixed according to the title.

I don’t think so. The more important point is that with regard to both the commissioners on the continent and in America they have not been able to ascertain exactly what their expenditure will be. The amount put down last year for the commissioner of commerce or the trade commissioner in America was purely tentative. Everybody who knows America, and many hon. gentlemen opposite know America, will know and recognize that it is a very expensive country, and if we have a commissioner there at all we must surely put him in a position to carry on in a manner worthy of the Union. The same applies to the Continent.

No, that is not expensive.

If the hon. member were to pay a visit to Europe now, he would find it extremely expensive. The hon. member asked me to give him some figures as to our trade with the Continent, with America and Kenya. I shall give him the statistics for 1922, 1923 and 1924. The figures for 1925 I have not yet got. In the statistics I am giving as to exports gold is not included. The exports were as follows :—Belgium: 1922, £1,213,809, or 4.4 per cent. ; 1923, £18,303,739, or 3.8 per cent. ; 1924, £1,646,392, or 4.6 per cent. France: 1922. £1,722,048, or 6.2 per cent.; 1923, £2,652,939, or 7.8 per cent. ; 1924, £2,866,570, or 8.1 per cent. Germany: 1922, £2,874,943, or 10.4 per cent. ; 1923, £2,592,292, or 7.6 per cent. ; 1924, £2,953,400, or 8.3 per cent. Holland: 1922, £756,423, or 2.7 per cent. ; 1923, £1,867,671, or 5.4 per cent. ; 1924. £1,576,262, or 4.4 per cent. Italy: 1922, £257,101, or 1.1 per cent. ; 1923, £258,513, or .7 per cent. ; 1924, £661,789, or 1.9 per cent. America: 1922, £1,897,397, or 6.8 per cent. ; 1923, £1,906,018, or 5.5 per cent. ; 1924, £1,215,191, or 3.4 per cent.

Gone down.

Yes, very considerably. It shows the necessity for the appointment which we have made, and of course the effects of Mr. Louw’s appointment are not shown here, because he only went last year. With regard to Kenya, our exports were :—Animals, sugar, ale, beer, stout, coal, carriages and carts, and tobacco. In 1910-14 the total was £11,250, in 1915-'19 £89,089, and in 1921 £81,940. Then there comes a tremendous slump. Of course, it is partly due to the depreciated money, but that does not account for the slump altogether. In 1922 the total fell to £41,824, and in 1923 to £21,950. I have not the figures for 1924 available here. The imports were, during those periods I have mentioned, £5,500, £59,000, £65,000, £92,000 and £95,000. They were probably coffee and cocoa. The reason for the slump is that during the great war, when we had the chance, we sent goods to Kenya which did us no credit in all respects, and the public of South Africa ought to be warned against that sort of thing. If we do not inspire the confidence of the purchasers of our goods abroad, we won’t succeed in building up an export trade, and Kenya is a natural outlet for us and ought to be a very big outlet. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) has asked me how it is that the Board of Trade and Industries is under me, and questions are constantly being answered by my hon. friend the Minister of Finance. My hon. friend has constantly to do with customs and taxation, etc., and of course a protective policy implies increased customs dues and taxation, and, therefore, he has answered questions in the past and naturally, they belong to his department. The hon. member has asked me about laying reports of the Board of Trade and Industries on the Table of the House and having them printed. I quite agree that when reports recommend increased taxation or increased protection, we ought to bear the expense of publishing them and putting them in the hands of the public. I will endeavour to act in that direction. I think we shall find that during this year, at all events, the board, which is being reorganized not only as regards its own personnel, but also as regards its staff, will be able to work more skilfully and more satisfactorily than in the past, and they will be able to lay these reports on the Table of the House, and where necessary, I do not say in all cases, but as regards all important reports, and especially reports recommending increased taxation or protection, see that they are put into the hands of the public. The hon. member asks about the changes that have taken place in the personnel of the board. I do not think I have ever, even by implication, promised that we will put a commercial member on the board. Commercial men are unobtainable for this purpose. Can hon. members suggest to me the names of such men who would command confidence?

What about Mr. W. A. Martin?

The Government offered the chairmanship of this board to Mr. Saunders, a late member of this House. Surely there would have been little objection to Mr. Saunders’ appointment. Mr. Saunders, however, is an independent man with a large business of his own and with large interests, and he did not see his way to accept the position. It would be a very great difficulty to get a commercial man who has been successful to take an appointment on this board at £1,000 a year, and certainly now that the appointment of the board is a fait accompli, the Government would not think of changing the personnel.

I understand you have made some changes during the year.

During the year the only change that has been made is that Prof. Fremantle resigned and Dr. Rossouw was put in his place. He was appointed for the remainder of the term that Prof. Fremantle would have served the board. Dr. Rossouw has served for the remainder of that term, and he has been reappointed now. The Government has absolute confidence in the present board. The argument that they are young men and inexperienced does not and ought not to weigh with the Government exclusively or very heavily. These are points which we took into consideration when making the appointments. You can find instances of most brilliant men in South Africa who were appointed to high positions when they were mere callow youths. Lord de Villiers is one, and everybody knows that the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Gen. Smuts) was appointed State Attorney of the South African Republic when he was a comparatively young man. The hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan! came to this country when very young, and all the more credit to Mm for doing, according to his lights and to his ability, what he has done. So really the question of youth does not really weigh with mo. The world is very old-fashioned. All our children to-day ere old-fashioned. They are men and women before they have grown out of their teens. The hon. member says that the board presumably was appointed or constituted because of the protectionist leanings of the Government. I must say I have never tested any member as to whether he held protection or free trade views. I simply appointed him because I thought he was fit and proper. It has been admitted that the board recommend many things that the Government does not follow. It shows that the board are independent, and are not, as is sometimes suggested, writing reports to order. I have never had the slightest discussion with the beard, or with any member of the board, as to the framing of their reports or findings. It does not necessarily follow that because the Government does not adopt their views and reports, that their views and reports are wrong. There is a vast difference between the duties of an executive power in the land and the duties of an expert body. I am sorry that the hon. member thinks that there is an absence of breadth of view on the part of the board. I have no doubt they will get broader and broader as they go on and will try and raise themselves to the standard set by the hon. member. As regards a general report on protection, surely the hon. member will realize that is a matter of Government policy. Generally, they have to deal with a certain article, and they have to report specifically and say whether there is a case for protection or not.

They gave us a thesis on protection last year.

Well, of course, that was necessarily in connection with the general revision of the traffic. The hon. member is not satisfied with that ; he wants the board to plunge specifically into this. It is not necessary to do that, and it is for the Government to determine the general policy. I quite agree they must not treat a case in an isolated way without correlating all the bearings of that case. I have no doubt the board endeavour to do that. As regards the differences in salaries between the trade commissioner in London, the trade commissioner on the Continent and the trade commissioner in America, it is clear, for the reasons I have stated, that there must be a substantial difference. Each position must be dealt with on its own merits. You have also to consider the particular class of man you appoint in each particular case. The trade commissioner in London is under the High Commissioner. Some question has arisen in the past as to his exact position, but it has now been decided that he is regarded as being under the High Commissioner, but that does not preclude the Minister concerned from issuing instructions through the High Commissioner to the trade commissioner.

Why don’t you put him under the High Commissioner’s vote altogether?

Because, under the High Commissioner, you have various departments. You have, for instance, an officer representing the Railway Department, and I think that appears under the railway vote. There are three or four such departments under the High Commissioner, and their votes have always appealed in this way. The trade commissioner in London is under the High Commissioner in a certain sense, subject, however, to directions from my department. He gets a subsistence and transport allowance of £500.

If the Minister will refer to the High Commissioner’s vote on page 23 he will find under the stores and shipping branch that there is a director of stores and shipping, an advisory engineer, etc., whereas the trade commissioner, who, the Minister has told us is under the High Commissioner, does not appear here at all. He has been considered for years as being under the High Commissioner. There is no rent charged to him, because he is part of the High Commissioner’s department. He should be mentioned here in the same way as other servants are mentioned.

It is purely a matter of book-keeping.

Yes, but this is the opportunity we have of bringing this matter up and getting it put in a way that can be understood. With regard to the Kenya business, is the Minister satisfied that we do get value for that? The figures he has quoted as to the trade done seems ridiculously small in return for spending £3,000 a year for keeping a man there. We are not going to get a bigger trade except in our natural products. When our own people require a protection of 30 per cent, or 40 per cent, to manufacture, how can we do any trade in manufactured articles with Kenya? We cannot do it. I see this is a growing thing. We have a commissioner two clerical assistants and a messenger. Each year it is something more and the trade is something less. That appears to be the position. Perhaps the Minister will forgive my asking if he has now ascertained exactly where Kenya is.

I wish to bring up a hardy annual ill the shape of the question of the Cinderella mine, now closed down for a number of years. It has caused destitution to a number of people in my constituency who invested their savings in property because that mine was in their district. The Minister’s predecessor appointed a commission to consider this matter, and also to consider whether an amalgamation could be brought about with the E.R.P.M., the adjoining property. The commission duly reported, and suggested the amalgamation, but this has been delayed because the Government has declined a request of the Cinderella directors that it should guarantee a debenture issue of £250,000. I must say I think the Government has acted rightly in this matter because it cannot be expected to take financial responsibility if it cannot share the possible profits. To be of the most practical value the Cinderella should work by itself, but if that is impossible, the next best thing is amalgamation with the E.R.P.M., which will at any rate stabilize the latter. Before the Minister or the Government agrees to the amalgamation, I hope they will insist that both these properties should, as far as possible, be made to work simultaneously. If the E.R.B.M. is merely going to move portion of its workmen from the E.R.P.M. to the Cinderella, it is not going to do much good in the way of employment. What I wish to know is what the Minister is going to do with the report of the commission. Is he merely going to pigeonhole it? The report has already been issued six months, and nothing at all has been done by the Government with regard to it, although the mine has been closed down for 13 years. We have, on the order paper, a bill intended to deal with a case like this—mines not working their holdings, and giving the Government power to step in and insist on their being worked, or cancelling their rights. I notice that the measure is getting lower and lower every day on the order paper, and I have a suspicion it is going to be one of the slaughtered innocents at the end of the session. It will be wrong if the Government permits this, because the reopening of the Cinderella is a matter of urgency, not only for Boksburg, but for the whole of the Witwatersrand. With regard to mining generally, I am getting impatient at the policy of the Government. As far as the mines are concerned, there is no constructive policy at all, and we are only drifting along. To mark my regret at the inactivity of the Government, I propose—

What is the particular point the hon. member wishes to discuss? Does he wish to avail himself of the 40-minute rule?

Yes.

Will the hon. member tell me on what question?

I wish to reduce the Minister’s salary, as a protest against the Government’s mining policy—or, more correctly, want of policy.

That is too vague. On what particular phase?

The general inactivity of the Government in regard to mining development.

The hon. member may proceed.

It is agreed that the country is very much dependent on the mines, but no new mines are being opened to replace mines which are being worked out. It is only a question of time when there will be an industrial and commercial collapse owing to the stoppage of mines, and then it will be too late to make up the leeway we have lost. Despite the fact that, it has so often been reiterated that the mines are coming to a speedy end people are beginning to disbelieve it, and the mines have themselves to blame, because they have bluffed so often, that when they do tell the truth the public will not believe them. The mines of the future are at deep levels, and it will take at least six years to get them to the producing stage, and some of the mines which are working to-day will, in six years’ time, be practically at their finish. The country is compelled to continue a mining policy, because we have to find traffic for our railways, employment for our people and markets for our farmers. Seeing that nothing is being done by private enterprise to open new properties, it seems to me a favourable opportunity to revive the question of State mining. The commission on State mining which sat in 1916 received a lot of evidence which is very useful and interesting, but in spite of that evidence, they reported against State mining on what I consider a side issue. They did not decide that there was no gold in the areas stipulated, but they did not think those areas could, by the State, be developed on sound business and technical principles. Many witnesses were called, including a number of men representing mining companies who naturally insisted that private enterprise should be allowed to develop the mines. They were unanimous, however, that, in the event of private enterprise failing to develop the mines, the State should step in and do the work. In my view private enterprise has already failed, because during all these years it has done nothing. The State Mining Engineer in 1916 said it was a matter of urgency to the Union that the far East Rand should be opened up, and that the State could not wait until it suited the mining houses to send in tenders in their own time. That was 10 years ago, and no new mines have been opened for eight years, and if it was imperative and urgent for these mines to be opened up then, it is considerably more urgent to-day. The Minister might take the House into his confidence, and say how long it will take before private enterprise can be said to have failed in the matter. To my mind, eight years is already more than enough, but apparently the Government does not share my view, or they would have placed something on the estimates for mine development. I would ask the Minister if he considers ten, twelve, or even twenty years long enough to prove my statement.

To prove what?

That private enterprise has failed to develop our mines. Even representatives of the Chamber of Mines have agreed that, if the mining corporations will not work our new mines, the State must step in and do it for them, and I think the time is overdue for the Government to take definite action in the matter. In the past different groups combined to get mineral leases at their own price, and they are depending on the public outcry which will arise as the mines-close down and unemployment becomes rife. As mines close down there will be an outcry to open up new mines, and the big houses will get the ground at their own prices. These groups are encouraged also by the press and others to keep on waiting until their offers are accepted, because the Government is bound to find employment. The view was expressed by the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) in the House some days ago, that if the Government cannot get better offers it should let the companies get rich areas at what they offer—that is making these people a present of millions.

How do you know?

That is my view. The State’s assets are very considerable. We read that the undeveloped assets on the far East Rand are estimated to be worth no less than £450,000,000. That is not the estimate of an optimistic company promoter, but that of the Government Mining Engineer—the leading technical official we have. He said—

Further Sir Robert Kotze said—

The Minister, when I raised this question last year, said the figures quoted were based on guesswork, but the guess is made by the highest mining official we have, who is impartial, has no axe to grind, and is absolutely independent. His opinion should take precedence over that of others whose interests it is to decry our assets in order to buy them for the companies they represent. I think State mining is what we should go in for, even if private enterprise would take on the work, because State mining has many advantages. It could work on a small, or on practically no profit, and the life of the mines would be practically doubled. We had the interesting argument from the hon. member for Kimberley (Sir Ernest Oppenheimer) the other day that the life of the mines would be much extended if the working costs could be cut down. Working costs would be automatically reduced if high profits were not essential. The Government mining engineer has placed on record the opinion that when you consider the indirect profits the Government gets, by means of railway rates and customs rates, and when you consider the employment provided, it would pay the State to work the mines, even if it did not get twenty shillings in the pound. When we remember that the mining industry circulates thirty millions annually in white and native wages and stores it seems to me that we should be prepared to make sacrifices to keep an industry such as this going. But if we can believe our chief technical adviser, who I think has the confidence of the House, we will not be called upon for sacrifices for we will not only make these mines pay, but they will pay off the national debt in twenty years’ time. Surely that is something to work for. It may be said that State mining elsewhere has not paid, but it has to be remembered that the deposits in the Transvaal are unique, and there is nothing like them anywhere else. When you talk about business risks, I would say that the mines of the Transvaal have been as reliable as other businesses. Undoubtedly there have been disappointments, but for one failure of a legitimate mine we have had numerous successes, and the failure has seldom been from inherent weakness of the mines, but owing to the greed of the vendors, in watering shares and the like. Further with regard to risk, Sir Robert Kotzé said that if we work large areas the risk is less, and that if we work the entire East Rand area under one control the State would have a distinct advantage over an individual company. The principle suggested was that the State could work from proved ground to unproved ground, and shafts need only be sunk where they were justified by results. Private enterprise for mine development has many disadvantages, apart from the fact that it is bound to a certain area, because the expenditure of a company must be high. In the first place, if it is a gold mine, the directors have to pay the Government a minimum of 10 per cent, profits tax ; and they have to provide another 20 per cent, minimum in dividends for their shareholders. With a capital of £1,000,000 in order to pay the Government and the shareholders, the mine would have to yield a profit of £300,000 a year, while the State working the same mine, and providing for interest and redemption on capital could do it for £75,000 a year. The Government mining engineer says that private financiers demand 15 per cent, for their money if it is advanced to mining companies. Seeing we can borrow money at 5 per cent., why should we pay 15 per cent, for money to develop our mines? Then the question has been raised, how are you going to finance such State mines? And I will be asked, are you going to risk public money? My reply is that the State has already received something like £16,000,000, which has gone into the public exchequer as its share of gold and diamond mining enterprises. In all well-regulated industries they have a renewals fund, and that principle could very easily be applied to the mining industry. We could apply some of this money year by year as it is received to renew the industry and lengthen its life. The hon. member for Standerton (Gen. Smuts), suggested that some of this money might be applied to bringing immigrants here. That seems to me to be putting the cart before the horse. Our first duty is to provide employment for people in the country, and the best way to do that is to continue the mines. In regard to risk, the Government is quite prepared to stand by and expect the mining companies not only to take the risk but to pay the Government for taking the risk. If the risks are as great as alleged it is absurd to expect private people to not only take the risk but share profits, if any, with the State. Then it has been said that the mining companies or the directors put up the money to develop the mines and do in this way a great public service. But that is not the case. When money is required for a new company the promoters appeal to the public. When the Government Areas were floated, the capital was over-subscribed about three times, and I am sure the same thing would happen again. If the Minister is not game to go on with mining with State money he might adopt Sir J. B. Robinson’s suggestion and invite the public to take shares in one of these companies. If the Minister did that, not only in this country, but overseas, the people would put their money into it, because they would know they were getting in on the ground floor and were having a fair run for their money. Then again with reference to the oft-repeated statement that the State cannot economically conduct mines I am quite sure we can run them if we so desire. The railways of this country employ more white men than the whole mining industry, and it is absurd to say when we carry them on so well that we cannot run a gold mine. Sir William Hoy said we could not run a gold mine because of political influence. It seems to me that that gentleman is rather speaking outside his book. The reason why we have had these electrification and elevator scandals in Natal was not because they did not have competent men in the service, but because that gentleman went outside to bring in supposed experts, and landed us in these very heavy expenses. The Minister last year said the Government should have worked the first State mine, which would have been a practical test, and its inherent richness would have made it a success. He also added that he did not see why it should not have been successfully run by the Government as the present enterprise was doing it. But the Minister should be reminded that when the first State mine was opened its contents were as those of other undeveloped areas, and its value was mere guesswork based on experience. I think it would be good policy for the Government to step in and say, we will work these mines. Last year the Minister promised to give us a definite pronouncement in regard to the Government’s policy in regard to State mining. I do not know how far the regrettable accident the Minister sustained may have interrupted his work in this matter, and whether he can tell us anything now, but last year he certainly promised that the Government, within a few months, would give a definite decision in this matter of State mining. I hope he can now promise that the Government is going to take up the matter seriously, as it is most imperative that we should have new mines. Owing to the long delay that has occurred, and the failure of private enterprise to deal with this matter, if the Government does not take it in hand I am satisfied that in the course of probably 20 years Johannesburg and the Reef will become very much what Boksburg is to-day, on account of the stoppage of the Cinderella, mine. Boksburg was at one time a happy and prosperous community; it is now a town of empty shops and houses. If new mines are not opened the same condition will apply in Johannesburg and other parts of the Reef, and the devastation will spread through the whole country. Therefore, I trust the Minister will recognize the seriousness of the case, and tell us that the Government is determined to go in for State mining, seeing that private enterprise has so signally failed in this matter.

I want to ask the Minister a question in connection with the Departmental Commission appointed last year and which has reported to him with reference to the supply of books to the department. As a rule it went through the Publicity Department of the railways and in the past the books were always bought abroad. I understand that an opportunity was never given to booksellers in the Union to supply books. I understand that about nine months ago the commission was appointed to enquire as to the prices booksellers in South Africa could supply the books at and on what conditions and to ascertain how those prices and conditions compared with those obtainable abroad. I understand that the report has been in the Minister’s hands for some time, but that nothing has as yet been done. I should be glad to learn how the prices compare. I have been informed that booksellers here can not only supply the books cheaper but that much time will be saved in consequence. Perhaps the Minister will inform us, or lay the report on the Table.

I should like to remind the Minister of the debate last year when I asked him whether the Government had decided on a policy with reference to proclaimed platinum fields. His answer then was—

I think the Minister was quite justified in giving me that reply last year, but I want to point out to him the alteration which has taken place in the position and circumstances of the platinum fields. It can no longer be said that an ounce has not yet been produced. Since January machinery and batteries have been working on the farm Onverwacht and a fair amount of platinum has already been sent to England and a considerable quantity of platinum has already been actually produced. Not only that, but more fields are on the point of being opened, and within a few days three other mines will begin to work. Thus the time that no platinum could be shewn has gone by. As for the speculation craze I also think that it is somewhat less and the fever is past so that we have reached the time when work will be done and that platinum will be actually shown. So I return to my question whether the Minister has a definite scheme as to what is to be done not only with regard to the old friends, but also with new ones which are being opened. Of proclaimed farms that do not belong to the State four-fifths of the mineral rights belong to the State, and the State decides how they shall be developed, whether by creating State mines or by leasing them under the 1918 Act, or disposing of them in some other way, i.e., by pegging, lottery or otherwise. I can assure the Minister that there has been a great improvement since I spoke about the matter last year. More fields have been discovered and more work is being done in the districts of Waterberg, Rusten burg and Pretoria. There are many more interests in the mines and fields and I should like to know what the policy of the Government will be. Then I want to say a few more words on letter J of the Vote on page 124, District Mining Development, construction, maintenance and repair of roads, drifts, etc., £4,000. I can safely state that since last year the district mines have gone ahead, not only as regards the goldfields in my district but various small mines have been opened and existing ones enlarged. In addition an important development has taken place in the mining of platinum, chrome and asbestos, and the new mines are almost all situate in an uninhabited mountainous country full of rivers and spruits so that the roads and paths and drifts are in a bad condition, and communication is very defective. I am therefore disappointed that the Minister notwithstanding this great progress has not placed a larger sum on the Estimates than last year. I must gratefully acknowledge that in the last five or six years a great improvement has taken place: In some years the amount was only £1,000 but yet I think that £4,000 is not sufficient, and I shall be glad if the Minister can see his way to make a further grant over and above the £4,000 available, so that the necessary roads of communication may be improved.

I think the Minister’s explanation with regard to the £10,000 which appears to have got in the hands of the railway people for publicity work, is unsatisfactory, as they have quite enough money of their own for advertising. An anomalous position has arisen in connection with the Board of Trade, and the time has arrived for it to be made into a separate department. The Minister of Mines himself is in a very difficult position, and the Secretary for Mines and Industries has probably more work to do than any other secretarial head. We have a very efficient Board of Trade, but it should be under a distinct department. In view of the encouragement we have received in the shape of inquiries from people abroad who want our raw products, is it not time to establish a grading board for our minerals? Numerous inquiries are being made, particularly from America, for South African minerals, but the first difficulty is that the bulk is not always equal to the sample, the former being exported in a crude state. There is the prospect of establishing a big industry in our non-ferrous minerals. We have a grading board for fruit, maize and other products, so why should we not have a grading board for minerals? The question of the platinum industry is a very important one. Recent unexpected developments in the Transvaal justify the opinion that South Africa promises to become an important producer of platinum and platinoid metals, and at least equal to Russia, which before the war had practically a monopoly of these metals. The products of the platinum industry have a restricted but always present market, with a decided tendency to expand, even although slowly. Hence the imperative necessity of a careful control of the market and of production according to market requirements, in order to maintain prices at a payable level. This has special importance for South Africa, where the bulk of the platinum reserves is contained in low grade propositions on the Merensky horizon, with a very low margin of profit. Platinum and platinoid metals reach the direct consumer only in the form of refined platinum and manufactured articles. Crude platinum— the direct product of mining operations—has only a very restricted number of consumers, namely, the existing refineries in Europe and America. Owing to the absence of a platinum refinery in Russia, which, up to the outbreak of the war, was practically the only platinum-producing country in the world, all crude platinum was sold to European refiners, who dealt with the producers of the crude platinum on the one hand and with the direct consumers of the refined article on the other, and acting in a “ring,” had in their hands complete control of the platinum market ; and, further, by ingenious manipulation of prices, paid to the actual producers as little as they could compatible with the maintenance of the industry. The result was the deplorable situation of the platinum industry in the country which was virtually the sole producer of this metal which, in many respects, is indispensable. When in 1898 the position became very acute and led, on the part of the producers and the Russian Government, to a realization of the necessity for taking immediate steps towards the establishment of a platinum refinery in Russia, with a prohibition of the export of platinum in its crude state, the platinum refiners had already become strong enough to enable them effectually to counteract for nearly a quarter of a century the measures taken by the Russian Government. To achieve this end, the refiners entered into long contracts on more or less favourable terms covering the entire output of several large platinum-producing concerns, thus creating opposition to the proposed measures among the platinum producers themselves. The refiners also acquired interests in the Russian platinum mines with the same result, and manipulated market prices so as, to create the impression that those measures were unnecessary. Nevertheless, when prohibition of the export of crude platinum from Russia was on the point of becoming law, the foreign refiners took steps towards establishing branches of their own refineries inside the country. Finally, successful diplomatic intervention by Germany led to an amendment of the law, so that prohibition of export was replaced by the imposition of an export duty on platinum. Since the beginning of the war, and the subsequent revolution in Russia, the position of the refiners became weak, owing to the cessation of the supply of crude platinum from Russia, which could not be made good by increased production on the part of Columbia and the establishing of a refinery in Russia, together with the proclamation of platinum as a state monopoly. This situation resulted in bringing two facts into prominence, viz., one (hat the present period is the first—and very likely the only—moment in the economic history of the platinum industry when the control of the world’s platinum market can be taken out of the hands of the refiners by the actual producers ; and, two, that owing to the discovery of platinum in South Africa, this moment is not likely to last long, as the refiners will naturally try to take the control of the South African platinum industry into their own hands, and steps to this end are already being taken by them. Messrs. Johnston and Mathey and the Mons Nickel Company have already secured a large number of contracts with actual or potential platinum producers. The conclusion is that if prompt action is not taken by the South African Government, the opportune moment will be lost, and when the refiners secure a permanent footing in the South African platinum industry, it will take a much longer time to put matters right than it did in Russia. The difficulties in South Africa will be much greater than they were in Russia, which at any rate enjoyed a monopoly of the production of platinum, which is not the case with South Africa. The measures to be taken immediately—and no other can effectively be devised—are: (1) The establishment in the Union of a refinery independent of European or American refiners, and in connection with this refinery a trading and controlling organization for platinum products ; (2) the prohibition of the export of crude platinum from South Africa ; and (3) an agreement with the Russian Government, which is now in possession of its own trading organization, in order to control the quantity of refined platinum to be released annually according to market requirements, and the maintenance of prices on a uniform level. I want to submit that that is the present state, and if this opportunity is lost we are going to be in exactly the same position as Russia is in. [Time limit.]

The hon. member for Boksburg (Mr. McMenamin) has raised a very important question of policy and one that I think we ought to have some pronouncement on from the Government. His point is this, that for some years past—I think he says for eight years, and that may be accepted as being correct—there has been no further development in the opening up of our gold mining properties in this country. He draws from that the inference that private enterprise in regard to the opening up and working of mines has failed, and, therefore, he says it is now up to the Government to start State enterprise so as to get these assets developed. I agree with him to this extent, that it would be a most serious drawback to the prospects of this country if we are going to allow these mineral assets to lie undeveloped for years and years and nothing is to be done to make them productive, and I think the Government should make up its mind whether it is going on with the policy, which it announced it was going to follow of State mining, and, if it is not, then to give private enterprise a chance of working these assets upon terms upon which reasonable business men can be got to take them up. There is no objection in the nature of things to the State working a mine. I have no doubt that the State can work mines just as well as it can run railways.

At a price.

Yes, exactly. What makes me rather afraid of State mining is just the sort of argument used by the hon. member for Boksburg himself. He said—

That is just the argument that is going to make State mining a burden to the people, instead of an advantage. Under private enterprise, if a mine can only be worked at a loss, the shareholders lose their money, and there is an end of it, but under a system of State mining that is not so. You cannot simply wipe out your loss, as the private enterprise mine does. Then, you are going to get this doctrine put in force, that a mine has never to be closed down if it is a State mine, because there would be so much loss of wages and stores. All that species of argument makes one feel that it is never worth while spending any amount of trouble to get 15s. out of the ground at a cost of 20s. Once you start a State mine and get vested interests going up round it, then the Government is going to be compelled to carry on that State mine, whether it is done at a profit or a loss. To come back to the other alternative—private enterprise—I must say that the Government ought to consider very carefully whether it is not insisting upon too difficult terms for private enterprise in regard to the leasing of these areas. The Government has got spoilt by having got on to one or two really good things. I was reading the other day the report of the year’s operations of the Government. Areas mine, and it appears that in that year the Government Areas mine made a profit of over £2,000,000. Of that £1,100,000 odd went to the Government, and £900,000 odd went to the shareholders. The Government derived from this mine the lion’s share, £1,100,000, although it does not risk a penny of capital.

All the gold belonged to the Government.

That may be, but what is the cost of getting out that gold? The point is that, even if the gold belonged to the Government, which it does not—the right of working it belongs to the Government—it is better for the Government if it can get that gold taken out by private enterprise at a reasonable figure, than to let it lie there. They have not all been good. Take a mine like Daggafontein. Over £1,000,000 has been sunk in that mine, and nothing has been got out of it. You cannot expect every mine to be a Government areas mine. I would ask the Government to consider very seriously whether they should not take one or other of these lines, either give private enterprise terms which will enable it to come in, or let them get to work and develop it themselves. Then I wanted to raise one or two other points.

I would like to know from the Minister what appointments he has made to the Medical Appeal Board under the Miners’ Phthisis Act. I would like to know from him also whether it is the fact, as we were told last night, that these two sections of the Miners’ Phthisis Act in regard to the sending away of natives from the Rand, are being evaded wholesale and, if so, why the law is not being enforced? The law is clear that an employer cannot send away a native from his mine without giving notice, and without the native being stethoscopically examined by a medical man.

Under what item is the hon. member speaking?

I am referring to the administration of the Miners’ Phthisis Act, which is a charge upon this vote.

That was discussed last night on native affairs.

The Minister never replied.

I do not want to stop the hon. member (Mr. Duncan). He may proceed.

If these allegations are true, it seems to me that the officials of the Department of Mines are not doing their duty, and that there ought to be prosecutions. It is a very grave charge to fling at an industry that it is absolutely careless as to the lives of hundreds of its employees simply for the purpose of avoiding compensation. I want to put it to the test to see whether this is true or not.

I am sorry, indeed, to say anything which may be looked upon as strictures upon this department, seeing the disadvantage that it necessarily suffered by the misfortune which overtook the Minister and caused him to leave his department in a way that, perhaps, that made it rather difficult to run. The Minister, who took temporary possession of it had to tell us from time to time that he did not feel justified in making alterations, in the absence of the Minister himself, a very natural decision. We are, indeed, glad to see the Minister back in his place, and anything we may say in regard to his department must not be taken as reflecting upon himself in regard to certain matters. I move, first of all—

I understand that it was formed during the war, and I would like to know what useful object it has in connection with South Africa, situated as it is overseas. I would be loth to stop any expenditure for the advantage of South Africa, but we find that the Minister of Finance has severely cut down all the Ministers in the various departments, and he tells us that there is not money enough for what we consider very essential services. In regard to this Mineral Research Bureau, I would like to know what good it is to us, apart from the outstanding fact that if we could save this £1,200, there would be that money to spend on far more useful institutions in South Africa. Then, in regard to Electrical Control Board, £100, I should like to know whether a recent appointment to that board was of a lawyer and not a scientific or technical man, and if so, what qualifications a lawyer is supposed to have in particular on an electrical control board ; except the doubtful advantage that a lawyer is supposed to possess of knowing everything about everything. I want next to refer to a special provision for a board of control in the Diamond Control Act. There is also a provision in the estimates for boards of control for the diamond diggers ; a very necessary expenditure, but I would like to ask the Minister why he dropped that proposition of his for a board of control in regard to diamonds generally. It is most unfortunate he has dropped that essential board arranged for under the Act, which he has the right to appoint. A board of three, who would, by this time, have been giving him advice in regard to diamonds, and particularly diamond cutting. Now he has to turn to his department, and those who advise the department, for guidance. Again, I would remind him of Woodrow Wilson’s advice not to turn to those who have special interests to conserve. If that board had been appointed, as we think should have been done, and as we expected would have been done, there would have been at least three men who, in a very short time, would have known the ins and outs of all there is to be known about the diamond industry; and he would not have had to turn to the hon. member for Kimberley (Sir Ernest Oppenheimer) and the hon. member for Beaconsfield (Col. Sir David Harris) for advice “for ourselves against themselves.” There are other items one could remark upon, for instance, the £280 for printing catalogues for scientific purposes. All through you will find scientific and technical men have succeeded in getting sums on the estimates which are of little use compared with the essential things we want in this country. In fact the whole system on which the country is being governed is development of the parlour and not the kitchen. We want the Minister to turn to the practical development of the country. I do not wish to minimize the value of professional men, but there is a tendency to spend on the ornamental and neglect the strictly practical. I want to remark on an appeal to the Minister made by the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan). On the 30th of March I put a question in regard to this, and I got a reply which was explicit ; but, unfortunately, in regard to my question whether there is an examination to see whether all home returning natives are suffering from phthisis, I neglected to put in the word “official,” and naturally the gentlemen entrusted with constructing the answers put in that “examinations” were made. The whole thing turns on whether thorough official medical examinations are made of natives before they are sent home. Possibly owing to their large numbers that has not been done in the past. I took care to investigate before I made those remarks. [Time limit.]

I want to associate myself with the remarks of the hon. member for Vredefort (Mr. Munnik) with regard to the mineral exhibits at Wembley. I had the opportunity of discussing the question with the official there, and his difficulty was, with regard to the supply of those minerals, to get the supplier in touch with the manufacturer on the continent and in America. There was no cooperation or co-ordination between the suppliers in this country and the manufacturers at home. Some system of grading should be set up. In many instances the manufacturers were prepared to take supplies and get forward contracts, but when they got into touch with the suppliers here in South Africa, it was found that they could not get supplies for three months ahead, and then in many cases it was not according to sample. A big industry has developed with regard to mica, chrome ore and other products. The official told me that the mineral exhibit at Wembley elicited the greatest interest there. I would like to suggest to the Minister that the Board of Trade and Industries might usefully function in the direction of building up some business department whereby the supplier can dispose of his goods to the best advantage. With regard to the item of £5,000, Springkell Miners’ Phthisis Sanitorium, I would like to ask the Minister in what way the Government is represented on that board, which manages the affairs of this institution.

I do not want to speak about the mines, but about the fishermen who make their living out of the deep. I want information from the Minister about the fisheries, because, as I understand, there is an item of £10,000 for that purpose on the estimates. If the Fisheries Commission, which has been appointed, comes to my constituency and recommends the bays there as places for fishing on a large scale, then I should like to know whether the Minister intends to give us £4,000 out of the £10,000. Take, e.g., Mossel Bay. When you arrive there you notice that the fishing boats near the station are collected, and that there is not a proper shelter. They have a struggle to catch fish on a large scale. Cold storage is required there in connection with the fisheries. Now the Imperial Cold Storage has already bought the business of the brothers Searle and our fishermen there are in their hands with regard to cold storage accommodation. The public will benefit a great deal out of the fishing at Still Bay and Mossel Bay if it can take place on a large scale. In Riversdale fish to-day is 1d. a lb., but when it is taken to Beaufort West, it costs 7d. a lb. Now I should like to know why there is such a great difference in price between places not very far from each other. However, more shelter ought to be provided, so that the fisheries can progress.

I would like to ask the Minister whether the Board of Trade and Industries is taking any steps with regard to organizations operating in restraint of trade. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention especially to the coal combine on the Witwatersrand. The Coal Owners’ Association has succeeded in capturing all the sources of supply. Only a few years ago there were a large number of retail merchants in a small way.

On what item is the hon. member speaking now?

On the item, Board of Trade and Industries. These small merchants have been compelled to raise their prices to the consumer by 4s. per ton. The retailers were able to make a profit at 20s. per ton, but the Coal Owners’ Association has laid it down that the price shall be 24s. The retailers have to charge that, or have their supplies cut off altogether. They are also limited to certain areas in which they can sell their coal. I will draw the Minister’s attention to another instance of an organization operating in restraint of trade. A merchant drew my attention to a fairly large American manufacturer who is dealing in working men’s clothes.

Order. What is the hon. member speaking about now?

I am speaking on the operation of the Board of Trade and Industries, or on what they should be operating, and I want the Minister to give us some information as to whether the board has enquired—

The hon. member may proceed.

This American manufacturer has given instructions that working men’s trousers shall be retailed over the counter for 19s. 6d. a pair. He tells me that, on account of his large turnover, it is not necessary to sell them at that price, and he can sell them at a fair profit at 15s. 6d. When he reduced the selling price to that amount, he was told by the wholesaler’s agents in Johannesburg that his supplies in that particular line would be stopped unless he was prepared to fall into line. These cases have been brought to the notice of the Board of Trade and Industries, and I have here a copy of a letter which has, I understand, been considered by the board. I want the Minister to give the committee some information as to whether steps are going to be taken in regard to these combines which are undoubtedly operating in restraint of trade.

I requested the Minister to give us some information in regard to the allowances for trade commissioners. For instance, I cannot understand why the trade commissioner in London gets £100 for entertainment expenses £220 ordinary allowance and £500 for subsistence and transport; total. £820, while the man on the continent gets £500 as entertainment expenses, £1,000 for subsistence and allowance ; total, £1,500, and the man in America £300 for entertainment expenses, £1,200 for subsistence and transport and £500 ordinary allowance; total, £2,400; and the man in Kenya £250 entertainment expenses, £500 subsistence and transport, and £162 ordinary allowance ; total, £912. I think the Minister should explain these items. It seems to me that many of these items of expenses for trade commissioners are exceedingly high and, in any case, they are disproportionate.

There is one other matter I want to ventilate. In regard to the item of £4,400 for mining development, that amount has been consistently reduced from £10,000. Does the Minister not think that this amount is wholly inadequate for the purpose for which it is intended? If you come to think of it, here we have an industry the direct taxation on which alone last year amounted to £4,900,000 and we have this inadequate amount placed on the estimates for mining development. The position to-day is that we practically leave the whole industry to develop itself, and trust to luck that something is found to push the industry along. The State is the largest potential holder in the industry, but the State takes no interest, and spends not one sixpence for the development of the potential wealth of this field. I am speaking entirely of the gold industry, not of the outside development. The result is that, on the Witwatersrand we have, as the hon. member for Boksburg pointed out, our leased mines, which the State has a very large direct interest in, being worked out, and we are practically in the same position as a mine living on its development and doing no further development. The State is not developing one further mine and doing nothing for posterity. You need only look a few years ahead to see that this industry must automatically stop unless some steps are taken. It is time the Government began to recognize their obligations, and that they are called upon to develop their own wealth. In any other industry, a man exhibits what he has to sell in the most favourable light in his shop window. We have these East Rand areas, and the public does not know that these areas are to be tendered for. They do not know the potential value of them. The Government must have a good deal of information they can give to the public. It is not right that we should come forward with a paltry £4,000 for mining development. The State is not carrying out its trust to develop its mineral wealth. We are not going to make up the period we have lost. Sooner or later our mining must automatically stop. We have enormous potentialities in the country. I would like to ask the Minister in this connection whether the question of the granting of the 519 claims at Mooifontein, which were granted to the Crown Mines, whether that received his full consideration. Roughly, the position was that there were two mines. The Crown Mines with something like 2,500 claims and a potential life of 25 years ahead of them—a very big concern working with very large tonnages—and its neighbour immediately to the west, the Consolidated Langlaagte, with six years’ life working with a number of white men and natives, immediately to the south are the 519 claims on the farm called Mooifontein for which the Government called for tenders. Tenders were put in by both companies, and the Tender Board stated that the two tenders were practically equal, and yet, on the face of that, the Tender Board recommended and the Government accepted the tender from the Crown Mines knowing that the other mine is going to ci ase work in six years’ time. One reason they have was that one of the members of the Tender Board represents the Treasury, and I can quite realize that they are actuated by a desire to get as much as they can. The alternate tender was £200,000 in cash. The Langlaagte Company, in perfect good faith, put in a tender on a sliding scale but the Treasury officials said £200,000 are better to-day than the same sum in five years’ time. This was a very unfair position to put the other tenderers in. The Act does not say that tenders shall be accepted on a cash basis. The Government has created a precedent in accepting a cash tender. It should have called for fresh tenders if it was prepared to accept cash. The Crown Mines not only cut off the Langlaagte Company from any further development in the south, but hold a number of deep level claims in the hollow of their hands. I think that is a very unsatisfactory position. I warn the Minister that there is a tendency on the part of the Government to get rid of the areas adjoining working mines, which areas are probably in themselves large enough to be sold as separate mines, while the very best and richest portions are being absorbed by existing mines. In the East Rand large mines have been allowed to overflow their boundaries and to secure adjoining claims, at their own price, because nobody else can compete with them. This involves a tremendous loss to the State. As soon as controlling groups have the idea that Government will allow this practice we shall receive no other tenders. The result will be that the gold mining industry will automatically come to a standstill. This is a pernicious policy, and I hope that Government will not accept cash tenders unless everybody has a fair chance of offering for such tenders. I hope the Minister will not allow areas to be cut up into small portions to be handed over to adjoining companies. The Sub-Nigel Company has just acquired 2,000 odd claims, which in the olden days would have provided ground sufficient for ten companies. The sale of Government gold claims should be properly advertised.

As I was, during my colleague’s absence, responsible for the allocation of the claims referred to, I will inform the hon. member the considerations which governed me in advising the Government to accept the tender. The tenders received from the Crown Mines and the Langlaagte Company were much about the same, but if we had given the ground to the latter company these two big mines would have expired about the same time. But by leasing the land to the Crown Mines we have separated by a considerable interval the dying out of the two properties. After considering the matter fully, I came to the conclusion that in the best interests of the country it was desirable to accept the offer of the Crown Mines. I think it was a sounder policy, broadly speaking, to arrange for a gradual cessation of work, rather than for one big mining district to come to an end at the same time. Then the present value of the cash tender was bigger than that of the other. After giving the matter due consideration, I had no hesitation in adopting the recommendation of the board to accept the cash tender. Whether the Consolidated or the Crown Mines worked the ground, it will make very little difference to the owner of Deep Kloof. I feel the department gave us, on the whole, the best advice in the interests of the country.

I would like to ask the Minister about Vote A (6), Fisheries. I would ask him what is being done in regard to marine and biological survey of fisheries. I see there is a vote of £10,000, but there is nothing to show, as far as I can make out, whether the vote which is down on the Estimate is afterwards surrendered or whether it is fully used. I would like some information as to what is being done in reference to the marine and biological survey of the fisheries, and whether any reports have been made which are available for members. A year or two ago we had some special reports by the people responsible for these things, and I think it would be very useful if hon. members were supplied with those as soon as possible.

Last year I drew the attention of the Minister to the importance of instituting an inland waters survey with the object, if possible, of evolving some policy which would result in these inland waters which are scattered throughout the length and breadth of the Union being stocked with some edible and suitable varieties of fish. The Minister received that suggestion very sympathetically, and he did more than that ; he appointed a first-class man, who went through the country and reported on most of the important rivers which are not already stocked with fish, and that report, I believe, is now in the hands of the Minister. We have, so far, seen nothing of it yet, but I would like to know, when the Minister replies to the hon. member for Rondebosch, when we are likely to get that report, or whether he is able to give us now a brief resume of the work that was done, the practical results that were achieved, and what his policy is to see that the excellent foundation work which has been laid is not to be wasted.

I was referring under Vote N, Miners’ Phthisis Expenses, to statements made by some hon. gentlemen in regard to questions put in the House referring to native miners’ phthisis sufferers going home. I have not referred to any particular managers. Naturally, managers do not want to impose burdens upon their mines which can be avoided. In this connection I would like to refer to the reply given to me which covers the question in the way I brought it up—

Why are not the managers prosecuted for breaking the law?

Well, managers simply send out these men to go away from the East Rand.

They are not sent back to the association compound.

It does not matter where they go to. They are not allowed to go away without a medical examination.

I am asking the Minister to see that there is a strict official examination of these natives. It is not merely a matter for medical men of the companies, who, of course, are interested in seeing that they have as little trouble on their mines as possible, but there was a question of men put on the train who were physically unfit to travel. One of the Portuguese doctors told me, personally, that men were being returned on their hands who were suffering from miners’ phthisis. I would like the hon. gentleman, who takes such trouble to defend these managers, to read reports of the Council in the Transkeian Territories where chiefs have complained again and again of the large number of men sent to work in the mines who come back to die, and receive-no compensation. I am not attacking individual managers. I am willing to admit, with the hon. member for Parktown (Mr. Rockey) and the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan), that the condition of the natives in the compounds is admirable. It is not a question of humanitarianism on the part of the mines ; it is because they get better economic value out of the natives. I do not want now to go into the question raised by the hon. member for Yeoville about State mining. Naturally, he represents those who are against State mining, or State banking, or State anything, but, as far as State mining is concerned, I hope that the Minister will take into consideration the advisability of offering part of the initial expenditure of opening up new mining areas. It may be true that the public have become reluctant to subscribe more money. Small wonder, seeing the poor shows shareholders have had from directors. The public are invited to put up the money ; it is not put up by the capitalists. We have a bad reputation round the world as regards the “kafir share market.” It is our duty, seeing the large revenue derived from mining—and we can get even more—to consider whether we should give greater inducements to open up new areas. Where it is a question of costing a million to open up a deep level, it might be considered whether it would not pay the Government to say that they would give £500,000 against a similar amount to be put up by lessees, on a profit-sharing basis. I see the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. dagger) shakes his wise head, but surely he himself, if he had a branch business which was going well, would say, “I will extend this, put in more capital, and assist in the expansion.” There is such a large revenue from this vanishing industry, and why not devote some of it to opening up other mines? I ask the Minister to look up the evidence given by Professor Laure before the Johannesburg Water Board enquiry, when opposing further development of water supply from the Yaal river. He predicted an early restriction of the industry. We should get out of this asset all we can before we are left with a huge debt. This evidence the Minister should weigh very carefully, and take from diamonds and gold all we can possibly extract from them, so as to help industry and expansion of mining.

I want to thank the Minister for the very full answer he gave to my previous question. There are one or two supplementary questions I want to ask, concerning the trade commissioner on the Continent. Would the Minister tell us whether a change is contemplated in that office? Would he tell us also where that office is to be finally situated? I believe it was in Amsterdam, and is now to be in Italy ; has any final decision been arrived at? I have been struck by the exceedingly large increase in this particular item. The trade commissioner for the Continent costs this country this year £8,274, and he has a staff of ten people, one principal clerk, eight clerical assistants, and one messenger. It does seem to me, without a full knowledge of the work he does, a very large amount, and perhaps the Minister would give us some information on that point. I do feel these offices outside the Union, who cannot in the nature of things be subject to audit by the Auditor-General in the same way as offices inside the Union, do require watching. I notice year by year the expense does go on increasing.

I should like to ask the Minister whether he feels that the office of the Trade Commissioner on the continent of Europe has not in the existing circumstances been established in the wrong place. All of us feel that the largest part of our trade is done with northern Europe. The conditions of our country coincide more with those of southern Europe than with those of northern Europe. We understand that Italy may become an important market for our produce, but that cannot weigh against our market in northern Europe for wool and other things. Especially with regard to our fruit trade which is now commencing to develop northern Europe is indicated as our market. If the Minister does not share the opinion of many of us, viz.: that the office of the Trade Commissioner is situated in the wrong town, then I want to ask him whether any provision has been made by him or the office of the Trade Commissioner to exercise supervision in the large towns of Rotterdam and Hamburg in connection with our trade. It must be clear that the trade there cannot be controlled from Milan. If the Minister thinks that Milan is the proper place for the office then I should like to ask him whether the time has not come for us to have separate trade representatives at Rotterdam and Hamburg. Then I should like to ask the Minister whether he has any further information with regard to the rumour recently published in South Africa according to which our Trade Commissioner issues a warning in connection with the threatened competition on the fruit market by the Argentine. The Argentine can easily injure us by its competition. We trade direct with the continent of Europe, especially northern Europe. If there is danger then it is not only the business of the fruit farmers of South Africa but of the South African Government, because this Government has to fall back upon the pockets of the farmers. The Government should at least take steps to assure the foreign market to our farmers. We have been informed that the fruit shipped on the " Edda” arrived well and that the sales were proceeding briskly. This pleases everybody. I have before me The Industrial and Social South Africa, and in it we are told of a further report by the Trade Commissioner. I notice that the Trade Commissioner is supposed to have said that we were unnecessarily frightened of the possible competition of the Argentine. Then he goes further and says that he does not think that that competition will be very serious for another two years. The two sentences in the report conflict with each other. If the competition will be dangerous in two years then the position is not satisfactory. Therefore I want to ask the Minister whether he has further information in connection with this important matter.

I wish to ask the Minister one more question. The British Government voted £1,000,000 to advertise empire products. A committee met in London to consider the allocation of this sum, and we were represented. Will the Minister tell us who represented us on that committee, what decision was arrived at, and how the scheme is operating? I understand that this money has to a great extent been allocated to the different parts of the Empire, and how have we benefitted by it?

I was surprised to hear the Minister say that he could not give the export figures for 1924, and it seems to me a strange thing that that should be so. Surely, if the Government is fairly up to date, it should be able to give these figures by this time. It is quite on a par with what is happening in connection with the customs returns, which are six months behind what they ought to be. Whether it is the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Mines and Industries who is in charge I do not know, but whoever is should see that these returns are up to date. The Minister seems also to be doubtful whether the board was under his department, or under that of the Minister of Finance.

There is not a shadow of a doubt— they are under me.

Questions are sometimes put to the Minister of Finance and sometimes to the Minister of Mines and Industries as to the working of the board. It would be better if the Minister of Finance took charge of the board, because the recommendations they make greatly affect his revenue and the budget, and it certainly would give him more control. He has a keener interest in its working than the Minister of Mines and Industries has. I was glad to hear the Minister say that in future the reports of the board will be printed and published, and I hope he will carry that promise out as promptly as he can. I hope the Minister will see that the board carries out the instructions laid down in the Acts laying down its duties, one of which is that they must state what the effect of their recommendations will be as far as the public and the consumers are concerned. So far as I can see, the consumers are never taken into account at all.

This question has now been raised on several occasions. I did reply to it before, but hon. members who were interested in the question were not present. The report of the Board of Trade was completed only shortly before I put the budget proposals into effect, and it was laid on the Table at the same day I made the budget statement. I at once gave authority to print it, and it is due only to the printing not having been completed that hon. members have not had it. It is not due to the unwillingness of the Government to allow members of the public to have the report. The board has been so busy investigating various matters that the report was not completed until a short while before the introduction of the budget statement.

Will that be rectified in the future?

We hope the work will become normal, and we will not have tariff revisions as we have had for the last two years. We have had to come forward with practically a new tariff, and the year after it was necessary to make extensive alterations. The major part of the work has been done, and these things about which minor complaints have been made will not recur in the future.

In connection with what the hon. member for Hope Town (Dr. Stals) has said about the office of the Trade Commissioner on the Continent, I also think that Milan in Italy is not exactly the best place, especially in connection with our fruit export. If we look at the map of Europe we must conclude that Rotterdam at the mouth of the Maas, and the estuary of the Rhine is the best place for a business office, to serve central and northern Europe. I certainly think that the greatest part of our trade must be done with central and northern Europe. I just want to add that I think the time has come to have a subdepartment of trade and industries as an independent department with its own secretariat of which, e.g., the chairman of the Board of Trade and Industries could be the secretary. If we consider all the branches which the Department of Trade and Industries already has in connection with the trade commissioners in Europe and America with regard to the advertising of South Africa produce, we feel that there is justification for a separate department of trade and industries of which as has been said the Board of Trade and Industries can be the practical head. That will expedite the work and complaints of members that they cannot get information sufficiently quickly will be removed.

We can accept the word of the Minister that he puts these things on the Table as soon as he can, but it is six weeks since his budget speech, and the printed copy of the board’s report is not on the table yet. I do not think it is the board’s fault that these reports are not published as early as possible. They seem to be handed in to the Ministers, and are not given out to the House as soon as they ought to be, or put before the House as soon as they ought to be, that is the special reports of the Board of Trade, and so forth. I certainly have that impression. There are one or two points I want to put to the Minister of Mines and Industries. I quite agree as to the urgency and necessity of letting out some more of the East Rand.’ Nothing has been done for some years, and it is bound to come to a very serious state when mines have to be closed down, as some of them will have to be from time to time. I do not go so far as the hon. member for Pretoria (West) (Mr. Hay) and say that we should give a bonus of £500,000 to anyone who will tender. That is really what it amounts to.

To put up part of the capital.

That would be a mistake. I say give them fair terms and then they might go forward. I am rather surprised that any people tender for any gold mines in this country. What do they get? Any man who takes a prominent part in the gold mining industry is looked upon as no good at all. He has to stand abuse from the cross-benches.

His methods.

For a man to be engaged in the gold industry is sufficient to damn him. They are fond of talking about the gold magnates. How many gold magnates are there? As a matter of fact most of those gentlemen who control the gold industry to-day on the Rand are officials.

Quite right.

And the men who put in the money are for the most part small investors. Where are all the magnates and all the tyranny hon. members are so fond of talking about? I take good care never to put a sixpence into gold mines or diamond mines. You are set down as a thief right away if you do anything in that direction. Then after you gave them the £500,000 the Government would come along for something extra. These men have in some cases to put in a million for development in the first place before they get a sixpence out of the mine. I want to ask the Minister what he is doing about the grading of coal in Natal which is sold to shipping for bunkering purposes. There was an Act passed. I also want to warn the Minister against appointing a Board of Control over the diamond industry, as suggested by the hon. member for Pretoria (West). The hon. Minister had a first-class man in Mr. Brink. What is the good of providing jobs for three other pals to look after diamonds? It, is not necessary. I want to point out to the hon. member for Durban (Berea) (Mr.Henderson) that lie is a bit too hard on the Minister. As a matter of fact, there are customs department’s statistics here up to 1924, but even this is late. We have nor got out yet the statements for 1925. I have tried several times, but you simply cannot get the figures. The statement for December is not yet out, and my hon. friend, in quoting 1923, is lamentably behind the times. The hon. Minister’s absence may account for it, but it does not say much for his department, not keeping him better posted up. Why does he not make some enquiries? Why should we have to wait until May for the previous year’s figures? Perhaps the Minister of Finance will take steps. It is not right. These figures lose their value after a time, and it is a reflection on the Department of Customs that they are not out before now.

I explained the reason.

But it is always the case.

It is bilingualism.

Yes, we were issuing these figures in one language, and I am going to see that the information is available to both sections of the public.

That is quite right. But these figures lose their value after six months. I agree with the hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) about the cost of these trade agents. The one in Kenya costs us something like £3,000. The trade in South African products in 1924 was only £48,000. It hardly pays. I would not withdraw the agent at once, but give him some warning that unless the business with Kenya improves, we shall have to close down his office. Unfortunately, as I believe, we shall not be able to do a trade with Kenya in manufactured goods. I have been thinking of sending up a man there with leather goods, but I do not think that it is possible to sell them as against the overseas article from Great Britain, with the cost of production going up as it is. The only trade we have a chance of doing in Kenya is in our own natural products, which we do now to a certain limited extent.

The Minister should get trade commissioners to supply at least annual reports which should be printed and distributed. We vote considerable sums which are increasing year by year, for them, and if they do not report how can we know what they are giving in return for the sums of money voted and how can South African producers learn if no reports are issued, which are the best markets for their produce? Unless they issue reports of wind benefit are these commissioners? I hope the Minister will get his trade commissioners to supply us with at least annual reports, which can be laid on the Table of the House and printed.

I should like to know a great deal more about the American trade commissioner. The office of the English trade commissioner costs £5,600 a year and he deals with the vast bulk of our exports. On the other hand the American trade commissioner’s office entails an expenditure of £6,200 annually. What class of products does the Minister think will be placed on the American market— I do not refer to certain minerals which America will buy in any case, but what additional business do we expect to obtain through the activities of the trade commissioner? ne not only receives £2,000 a year, but an allowance of £500 and £300 on the top of that for entertaining, making altogether £2,800, not to speak of a subsistence and transport allowance of £1,200. We seem to be setting up a sort of foreign office in America. I am very sceptical as to what additional business we are going to obtain by having a trade commissioner in America.

A motion was introduced by the hon. member for Troyeville (Mr. Kentridge) in regard to the nationalization of the iron industry, but it was withdrawn on a promise which he said had been made by Government that it was going to bring forward a comprehensive scheme. Can the Minister tell us what has become of that scheme? Rumours are floating about that the Government is considering the guaranteeing of the interest on the capital to be invested in a new iron and steel project. These rumours are very perturbing to people who have had the initiative to establish such an industry, and they should be reassured that nothing is going to be done by Government to damage them.

I move—

In order to draw attention to the dissatisfaction in connection with the administration under his department of the mining regulations. I can assure the Minister that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction on the Rand in regard to the way the regulations are being employed. I understand that new regulations are now being drafted, and that those regulations are being considered by a body of men consisting of the low-grade mining inspectors and the mine managers, but without any representatives of the men most concerned, that is the sub-inspectors, the men who have the most intimate knowledge of the regulations in question. The most practical men that the Minister has in his department, as far as the mining inspectors are concerned, are the sub-inspectors. The Phthisis Prevention Committee is a most representative body, and if a body such as that were called into consultation in connection with the new regulations, I think everything would be satisfactory. There is a system now creeping in on the mines on the Rand known as the continuous or over-lapping shift. In connection with that system of continuous working underground, 12, 14 or 16 hours may be fairly frequent, because of breaches of the regulations. We have instances where men are charging and blasting up to 170 holes on one shift, and I contend that it is absolutely impossible for a man to supervise that area and charge and blast that number of holes and, at the same time, observe the mining regulations. We have men looking after gangs of up to 118 natives, and I say it is absolutely impossible for a man to look after 118 natives, and at the same time observe the mining regulations. We have men looking after that number of natives and charging and blasting that number of holes, and also being responsible for the working of six and seven machines. It is common knowledge to-day, although it seems very difficult to bring people to book, that the natives underground are working longer than 8 hours, that they are working 9 and 10 hours underground, and that many white men are also working longer than the legal hours, and it seems that the only way to deal with this evil is for the Government to introduce legislation making a legalized number of hours, bank to bank, and not face to face, as it is to-day. In my opinion, the whole of the inspectorate staff needs overhauling, and as far as the inspectors are concerned, they should have nothing whatever to do with the policy of the Government, nothing to do with the question as to whether the mines are paying or whether the mines are not paying. We found during the course of our investigations on the Mining Regulations Commission that practically the whole of the inspectors took their job from this point of view, that they were concerned with the question as to whether the mine was paying or not, and the question of whether they enforced the regulations, or whether they relaxed the regulations, or whatever action they took, was dealt with in the light of the payability or otherwise of the mine. We say these inspectors are there to see that the regulations are carried out. In the past there has been far too much co-operation between the management and the mining inspectors, and far too little between the inspectors and the men. With regard to the subinspectors, I would like to see greater opportunities given to these men to rise to the very top of the inspectorate. As far as this overlapping shift is concerned, we find men working on the Simmer Mine a continuous 14¾ hours. We have this system creeping in on the mines, even on mines that are to-day making a handsome profit. We find the sole object of the mining houses is to increase the profits they are making to-day without any consideration whatever for the human element employed in the mining industry. We find the mining houses coming forward with a proposition that men should start work at seven in the morning on the first shift, and that the other shift should come on at 2.30 in the afternoon and work until 10.30 at night. These men are simply living to work. They are denied all the social amenities of life. I would ask the Minister if he is prepared to go into the question during the recess, and, if he is satisfied that this thing is not as it should be, and if it is possible for the mining industry to carry on its work during the natural working hours of the day, whether he would be prepared to consider the question of bringing in a legalized number of hours bank to bank, and take into consideration the question of laying down the exact hours during which mining operations are carried on. I do not think there is any hon. member who, if he had the opportunity, would agree to start work every day of his life at 2.30 in the afternoon and finish every night at 10.30. It is asking too much. We contend that the overlapping of shifts means increased facilities for avoidance of the mining regulations. I can assure the Minister, from reliable information, that as far as the work of the mining inspectors is concerned, there is no great improvement in the administration of these regulations. What we would like to see is far more surprise inspections carried out, and we would like to see the inspectors spending a great deal more time underground in surprise inspections instead of notifying over the telephone when they are coming and what time they will be there. I may say that the chief inspector in Johannesburg openly informed the manager of the Randfontein Mine that inspectors were coming. We contend it is not the duty of inspectors to warn the management. If strict instructions are given I think the Minister will soon find a change in the conditions. I hope the Minister will go into this question. If he gets in touch with the mass of workers on the Witwatersrand he will find that everything I say is true. There is great dissatisfaction on the Rand to-day. The regulations are being avoided both by the management and the men. If the regulations are standing between the management and a greater output, I would not give much for the regulations. The same applies to the men. As long as you have the contract system and payment by results, you will find that, as long as the regulations stand in the way of their earning a livelihood then the men will break the regulations. If you have not a system of strict supervision then you will find the management placing more and more responsibility on the shoulders of the white employees underground and extending the work of the native boss boy without any increase in pay. The responsibility under the regulations is being carried by the white man, and he is saddled with a great deal more responsibility than it is possible for him to carry. If you subpoena the books of the mining inspectors you will find frequent entries of fines, and you will find sub-inspectors continually reporting to their chiefs serious breaches of the regulations by the management, and all that is being done, except in isolated cases, is a letter of warning to the management. Letters have passed between the Mines Department and the East Rand Proprietary Mines regarding serious breaches of the regulations for two years without prosecution. If they are drawn up so badly that it is possible to drive a horse and cart through them then it is up to the department to see that they are drawn up clearly and explicitly. I hope, as far as the workers of the Witwatersrand are concerned, that they will get the sympathy of the Minister. This matter is brought to his notice for the purpose of having it rectified. I hope we will have a re-organization of the inspectorate ; and overhauling is badly needed.

I do not rise to move a reduction in the salary of the Minister, but I must say that I have never yet seen a Government having had so many motions for reduction of salary by its supporters. It convinces me more that hon. members on the cross benches are people who will never be satisfied. I do not wish to attack the Minister, but I want to ask the hon. member for Brakpan (Mr. Waterston) how it is that the Minister of Defence, the trusted leader of the Labour party, who acted for a time as Minister of Mines and Industries, did so little for them. The attitude taken up by members of the Labour party is really sad, and everybody will acknowledge that they are people with whom nobody would like to work. I have already said this to my friends of the Nationalist party. They have a man, who knows the gold mines in and out, and who has always fought them strenuously, at the head of the department of mines, but when he is at the head then his own supporters come and attack him and the Government. I have never yet heard of such a thing, and I have had the privilege of sitting in this House for a very long time. I have never yet seen so many motions for reduction in the salaries of Ministers.

They are in favour of retrenchment.

The hon. member for Riversdale (Mr. Badenhorst) does no know hon. members on the cross benches, but he will learn to know them. I hope the mine workers will note what the hon. member for Brakpan has said, because it will open their eyes and prevent them from putting people of that kind in responsible positions again. They are, moreover, unfit for them. It must also be an “eye-opener” for the Nationalist party. I do not know how the Minister will dispose of all the complaints which he has received from members on the cross benches, but I should also like to be informed by the Minister about the Appeal Board which has been appointed in the Miners’ Phthisis Bureau. I should like to know whether the Appeal Board is worth the expenditure, because it costs several thousand pounds. I should like to know how many cases of miners’ phthisis have already been dealt with. Or has the Appeal Board merely been established to give work to people who have been promised jobs? I therefore enquire how many cases have already gone to appeal, and another question has already been asked this afternoon, viz.: Who are the members of the Appeal Board? I should also like to know that.

I only want to say a few words with reference to our status as one of the nations which is on an equal footing with the other nations of the British Commonwealth, and particularly with regard to the office of our trade commissioner in the U.S.A. The trade commissioner there has his office in New York ; he represents practically our Government there, and must often get into communication with the United States Government. He must often convey requests to Ministers there, and he cannot do so unless they go through the British Ambassador at Washington. He is not acknowledged as the representative of South Africa. He must first go to the British Ambassador there, who submits every little request, however insignificant, to the American Government, and then the Government sends its answer to the Ambassador, who in turn gives it to our representative. There are also trade commissioners for Canada and Australia who have their offices in New York, but they are representative of their people, and deal directly with the American Government. The trade commissioners for Canada and Australia have a status enabling them at any time to deal directly with the American Government, which they actually do. As I understand, the difference is that a special authority has been issued to the Australian and Canadian commissioners by their Governor-General, and they hand over the authority to the American Government, which, as a result thereof, treats them as representatives of a separate nation. We, on the contrary, are not acknowledged as such, but are regarded as one of England’s colonies. I think hon. members on all sides of the House will agree with me that if that is right, the time has come to give our trade commissioners also the status held by the other commissioners, because otherwise it is clear that the United States will look down on us as inferior in comparison with Canada and Australia. The psychological result of that is clear. They say: Canada and Australia are on equal footing with Great Britain, but South Africa is only a small colony. I appeal to the Minister to investigate the matter, and to see if we cannot get the same status for our representative. We have a trade commissioner there who is known in this House, and it is unnecessary to praise him. I only want to say this, that Mr. Louw was one of our colleagues, and is a man who is giving great satisfaction.

What has he done?

I will just tell the hon. member what the people over there think of him. I regret the observation of the hon. member. One of our prominent business men in South Africa, Mr. Sturrock, stated at a public function that the appointment of Mr. Louw was a very happy one, and he said that the commercial community of South Africa had great confidence in him. Recently Mr. Louw addressed a meeting of business men in Canada, and I have here a cutting from the “Citizen,” Ottawa, Canada. It contained a report of the meeting, and indicates that it was not a meeting of worthless people. Sir Robert Borden sat at Mr. Louw’s side, and there were quite a number of senators, generals, leaders in the business world and professional men of Canada were present. About his speech, the paper says that seldom has a speech by a comparatively young man made such an excellent impression, and various members of the critical audience, business men and others, congratulated him on his speech. I will not read any more. A speech does not prove that anyone is doing good work, but I just want to point out that the commercial community here and on the other side have confidence in Mr. Louw, and that he has made a name for himself there. I should be sorry if hon. members opposite spoke with contempt of him and his capacity. He has only been there a few months, and we cannot expect that in a short time he should turn the world upside down. Let us give him a fair chance.

We shall be able to see next year what he has done.

I only mention it to show what respect he has won, and I hope the Government will give him the proper status that is his due. He is a man of great capacity who is doing his utmost.

I trust there is no sinister significance in that, when the mining vote is being dealt with, certain hon. members of the front Opposition benches who participate in control of the industry, are not present and that the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) (Mr. Geldenhuys) has apparently been deputed to act for them. I want to say that I support the hon. member for Brakpan (Mr. Watersten) with regard to what he said about the carrying out of the mining regulations and the inspections carried out on the mines. It was a surprise to me when I heard him say that a committee was being formed to go into the question of the reconsideration of the regulations, and that on that committee the only bodies represented were the mine managers and departmental officials. Such a committee cannot give satisfactory findings and recommendations. It goes without saying that its recommendations will not be accepted by the rank and file and it is they who have to put these regulations into operation under the test of work on lines of efficiency. I trust that what the hon. member for Brakpan has said will be borne in mind if such a committee is to be set up. In the matter of vertical and inclined shafts we find the percentage of the total of fatal accidents to be 16.35 of the fatal accidents in the mines thus a very high percentage is of men employed in the shafts, when it is taken into consideration that the proportion of workers employed there is from two to four per cent, of the working staff of a mine, but not exceeding four per cent. During my experience I never saw a mining inspector go down a shaft for the purpose of shaft examination. Never have I had the experience, with one exception, of doing work in a shaft under an official who had any knowledge of the working or construction of a shaft. The mining official gets his position by cutting down the working costs in the body of the mine, and has no need of any practical knowledge of shaft work. The insurance companies charge the highest rate of all to men employed in shafts, and it must be obvious to anyone that it is a very grave oversight that the safety of persons working in shafts and that of persons travelling in shafts is not made a special object of attention by the inspectors. Winding engines and ropes are inspected and certified periodically. The same should apply to the travelling ways. In addition, qualified practical men should be placed in responsible charge. Again, special times are fixed for blasting, these plans are fixed by schedule, and the aim is to ensure safety and the avoidance of breathing of dust and smoke. The mining official takes all the credit for the reduction of the accident rate and the phthisis rate, but he is the last man to go down, and the first to come out. He goes during the shift when the conditions are normal ; when the conditions are those which obtained when hon. members visited the mines last year. The most critical time is when the shift comes on, and when the work of a shift is about to be completed. I submit that the officials, especially in the scheduled mines, should be in those mines not only when the shift workers commence work, but also until the end of their shift. The last man there prior to the blasting should be the official. I myself, did not join the sight-seeing parties that went down last year ; I did not care to place myself in the position of criticizing my host, because I knew that the conditions would be the reverse of those that obtain normally in the mines. The visit was undertaken with an obvious purpose. It was ostensibly that of instruction or education—actually, the purpose was propaganda. I will not say it was a deliberate misrepresentation of facts, but the creation of impressions of the conditions different to what they actually are. I wish to tender my congratulations to the Minister on the unorthodox step he has taken (according to the precedent laid down by the previous Government) in having given encouragement to an individual trying to prove, or giving him an opportunity of disproving, the existence of favourable reefs in the Boksburg area. I trust the country will profit by it. I myself and the whole community of the East Rand, particularly the far East Rand, are keenly disappointed that something definite has not been done regarding the Government areas there. I may refer more particularly to Geduld East. There can be no doubt to-day, when working costs are brought down as they have been, and with the scientific advances in processes of the extraction of ore, that these mines must be at least payable. We find in the Government mining engineer’s report of 1924 that there has been a reduction of white employees of twenty-nine per cent, and of coloured employees of four per cent, (underground) per 1,000 tons of rock hoisted per shift. Taking all employees, surface and underground, the reduction is twenty-five per cent, and two per cent, respectively. That itself should not be passed over without remark. It is always claimed that the obtaining of greater efficiency gives a further field of employment for civilized labour, whilst here the contrary is proved to result. The appropriate commentary is obvious. The working costs in 1914 were 17s. 1d. and in 1924 19s. 7d., an increase of 2s. 6d. per ton. One must not forget that the initial cost of erecting reduction plant is much less than in 1914. You dispense entirely with the old stamp battery. The new sliming, process is improving daily and cheapening the initial capital outlay necessary to bring the mine to the producing stage. [Time limit.]

I wish to direct the Minister’s attention to a certain mine in South West Africa and I hope when the new legislative council which is about to be elected in that territory is set up, it will bring pressure to bear on the mines department. A number of miners who have been recruited in Johannesburg have gone down to South West Africa and after a few months there have come back broken in health. It is not a gold mine, it is mining vanadium. It is the Uris mine, situated near Bobas. It is not scheduled in any sense of the word. I am told that of the natives that are brought there to work the longest period of service they are able to give is four months, they then have to give up, broken in health. The symptoms of the disease are very similar to those of phthisis. The men get short of wind, lose weight and seem to collapse quicker than the phthisis men on the Rand. I am giving this for what it is worth. One or two of the men have come to me and complained. It is mandated territory and for a good many years there has been no proper channel through which these men could bring their complaints. There is some need for investigation. I understand the property employs about 40 white men and something like 400 natives. I make no charge against the mine officials or mines department. I am only passing this on as it has been given to me and if there is anything in the complaint I hope the Minister will see that this state of affairs will cease.

This matter, although it may not be of general interest to members of this honourable House, is of intense interest to the country, because it is constantly asserted that on the mining industry depends the prosperity of the rest of the country. I agree, of course, that the farming, commercial and industrial communities are largely dependent on it now, but permanent prosperity does not depend solely on mining, but rather on the national activities we build on that foundation. There is another very important factor in regard to reduced costs. Forty-two per cent, of the native labour employed on the mines to-day is entirely voluntary, it is not recruited, so that everything, including reduced pay to white miners, seems to be contributing to pull down the cost of mining. The increased cost, in spite of these factors, may be accounted for largely by the fact that we are going in more and more for deep-level mining. It goes to over 6,000 feet to-day, and in the far East Rand the average depth is three to four thousand feet. This annual report of the Secretary for Mines and of the Government Mining Engineer is one of the most interesting publications the Government is responsible for. It is a compendium of information, chock full of fascinating statistics, and should be studied closely by all sections of active thinkers. I make no reflections on any individual ; but I want to say that the development of a young country like this, with its enormous natural assets, requires something more than statistical accuracy; something which one might say, with confidence, contributes very much to the success of private business enterprise, namely, vision and some imagination. It may be that some will say that imagination is rather a dangerous ingredient to bring into business ; but I do not think that any business man will contend that, without some visionary forethought, he would have built up a successful business, and if the State wishes to keep pace with private enterprise and to lead, instead of to follow, the wishes of the people, the Government needs to import into the conduct of its business a little bit of that vision and imagination. We have enormous platinum areas, and, so far, the activities therein have been confined pretty well to the share market. That does not by any means tend to develop the platinum industry. Just as in the beginning of the gold industry of the Witwatersrand the share market made many people rich and many more very poor, the same thing is happening in the platinum fields. But after we have arrived at the stage where we are beginning to extract a marketable ore, we shall find we have a highly payable asset. Before the great war, the world was absorbing over 250,000 ozs. of platinum per annum. It is being supplied to-day with less than 100,000 ozs. If platinum were only getting the same price as gold, it would still be payable to work the platinum areas already proved. At present it is £21 per oz., and even if, consequent on abundant supply, it goes down considerably, we will still have a great asset. These areas have drifted into the control largely of the same people who control the gold and diamond industry. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to this. I can assure him it is giving rise to considerable interest and perturbation. Your native labour position is such that there is a great fear that the mining houses which control the Witwatersrand will hold up the platinum areas and decline to work them adequately or on a considerable scale until they arrive at a stage when they can transfer their cheap labour from the gold mines without loss to themselves. The platinum fields are highly payable, and I think measures should be taken by the Government to see that they are not made dependent on native labour at all, but are used as a field to demonstrate the possibility of doing our mining work by European labour, paid for at European standards. It is done in other countries ; was done in Russia before the war, when the bulk of the world’s supply was obtained there, and I am sure the richness of the areas so far disclosed will enable us to do the same in this country; but if the alternative I have suggested is allowed to develop, we can see the platinum areas being used simply as gambling stock. History will repeat itself, and people who are putting their money into the areas at present, and thereby evincing their confidence in this country and its resources, will incur loss, because their shareholdings will depreciate by exhaustion and be thrown on the market at the price of waste paper. Reverting to the matter of the Geduld, I wish to say that it was most unfortunate that the Minister last year gave such a definite pronouncement to the effect that the Government would not entertain the idea of State mining. That was tantamount to telling the mining houses that the Geduld could lie there if the mining houses did not have it on their own terms. They are not anxious to take it, because they have sufficient hay on their fork. The mining groups are in no haste, because the gold-bearing areas are just as useful to them as an exploitable asset in 20 years’ time as they are to-day. If the Minister had not been so definite in his pronouncement, it is possible he would have had more satisfactory offers from the mining houses. If we ourselves are really too timid and too apprehensive of incurring loss to work these areas for the country or State, we are placing ourselves in rather a false position if we ask the mining houses to make liberal tenders for properties which we are afraid to exploit.

I should like to ask the Minister whether he is aware that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction on the Witwatersrand in connection with phthisis administration, and if he is aware that there are still many anomalies in connection with phthisis compensation, and if it is the intention of the Minister to go into the question of some method of compensation for the loss a man suffers in his physique owing to the number of years he has been underground. Is the Minister prepared to undertake that? When a man works nine or ten years underground, although he may be certified as not having contracted miners’ phthisis, he may yet have some trace of the disease. It is very difficult for a layman to pit his opinion against that of the Medical Bureau. But it appears to me that if the work were divided, and instead of all the members of the board sitting together on every case, they should divide the work so as to be able to devote more time to individual cases instead of rushing them. I don’t think the X-ray has reached perfection so far as showing phthisis. Mistakes have been made, but I believe they are perfectly honest, and do not suggest that there is any corruption in connection with the Bureau.

I don’t think the hon. member has given the correct version of the procedure at the Medical Bureau. Cases are separately examined. Each case is X-rayed, and the photograph is developed while the man is being examined by one doctor. If there is any doubt in the mind of the latter, he calls in a second doctor, and the report, whether of one doctor or two, is sent to the room where all the doctors meet together, and the X-ray photographs are thrown on the screen in front of the whole board, whose report must coincide with that made by the doctor or doctors who personally examined him, and particularly his chest stethoscopically. The procedure is so perfect, that mistakes are small and very infrequent. It is wrong to attempt to stigmatize the whole proceedings as being open to serious doubt. The members of the board do their utmost to arrive at a correct diagnosis. The X-ray apparatus is very near perfection, and if a lung is diseased or degenerated, it is fairly easy to detect it by means of the X-rays. Fibrosis in the lungs is also easily seen, but naturally, where fibrosis is very slight, there is a certain amount of difficulty in detecting its presence. The Bureau doctors have become exceedingly expert in their diagnosis, and it is not right to give the impression that mistakes are frequent or important. The fibrosis may be obscured by some other disease, but the Bureau has reached a state of perfection of which the country may be very proud. Years ago the board fell under suspicion amongst the workers in about the mines, but to-day the excellence of its work reflects the very greatest credit on the institution. It compares very favourably with similar institutions in Australia and California.

I made no attack on the Medical Bureau, and I know as much about the system of examination as the last speaker. When the board makes its final decisions, I have seen X-ray plates exposed almost as fast as the attendant could rush them through the projector. If the doctors were able to devote a little more time over their final decisions, it might lead to improvement. I believe there are too many cases for the doctors to cope with acting as a joint body. I have seen some medical men shake their heads when the decisions were come to, as if they were not too sure about the cases.

It is quite true the plates are rushed through the projector, but sometimes five or six plates of the same patient are shown by way of comparison. If there is any doubt about the case—and the man has been X-rayed previously—then all the plates of him are screened for comparing his present condition with his former condition. It is quite possible there may be some shaking of heads by the doctors, but that shows that there is some doubt, and that the doctors do take time in arriving at their decisions. The final decision is arrived at by the board only after the reading of the report of the doctor who first made the personal examination. Without technical knowledge of what is happening there, and without a clear understanding of the process, it is very difficult for a layman to draw a correct inference regarding the board’s operations. The greatest care is taken, and every case is closely examined.

I want to say a few final words on the opening up of the East Rand areas. The impression was conveyed by the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) that Barnato Brothers are presenting the State with over £1,000,000 a year. I have an extract from the annual report to December, 1925, which shows a working revenue of £3,706,000, a working profit of £2,088,000, and a credit balance from 1924 of £245,000. They had available for allocation £2,375,000. The Government’s share of the profit for the year was £1,126,000, and then there was miners’ phthisis sanatoria, etc., £2,456. (Not such a stupendous amount as is generally believed.) The capital expenditure absorbed £201,000. If this were not a Government mine that capital expenditure would not have come out of the revenue in the way it did, but would have been found by issue of reserve shares or by debenture bonds. Dividends 16 and 17 amounting in all to 65 per cent, per annum came to £910,000, with £16,122 Union and provincial taxes, thus accounting for the whole amount, and leaving a balance credit forward to the following year of £119,000. These figures do not lead one to believe that the shareholders of this mine are having a bad deal. The total dividends of that mine taken over a period of nine years aggregate 532½ per cent.

What is the capital?

£1,400,000. The mine has from 30 to 40 years’ life ahead of it and the total amount paid out in dividends must be somewhere in the neighbourhood of £7,500,000. That is, of course, probably the greatest gold mine that has ever been known, but even if you take a mine that is going to give you one-half the profit result that this mine has done, it is still a very profitable venture. Taking the far East Rand mines as a whole, you have eleven mines in this area which account for 75 per cent, of all the dividends for the year paid by the W.W. Rand mines, amounting in the aggregate to £6,155,726. Surely it must convince the Minister and the Government that there is a source of revenue lying here waiting. The unemployment question in the country is still acute. There are cases coming to one’s notice daily which tend to prove that, although measures have been taken by the Government, and machinery has been set up to deal with unemployment, the actual provision of employment, with the exception of a number of minor industries and taking into consideration Government service, railways, etc., there is still a very big unemployment problem to deal with in this country. The efficiency of the European worker in this country has been Frequently reflected upon and animadverted upon in this House. I have got here the costs sheets of an Afrikander miner who, in March last, made a world’s record in stoping 380 fathoms in a month, which had two working days taken out of it, as follows: This was obtained with two of the small type of drilling machines known as the “jackhammer” which has revolutionized stope mining and almost entirely superseded hand-drilling. Five years ago this tonnage would have required at least five of the older and heavier type of machine with all its attendant additional cost of native labour, air power, explosive and mechanical upkeep. Formerly the white miner would have had a clear cheque equal to about £1 per fathom, but this man got one-sixth of that amount. It is obvious that efficiency of appliances and method and labour have increased enormously, whilst wage costs have decreased in even greater latio. [Time limit.]

I would like to briefly confirm the remarks of my colleague, the hon. member for Brakpan (Mr. Waterston), in regard to the dissatisfaction that exists at the present time on the mines, so far as phthisis compensation is concerned. It is well known that the amendments we passed last session only applied to the men who had already left the mines. The men now working in the mines are not affected at all. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst those who are working that the compensation is so small. I would ask the Minister whether, during the recess, he would consider some sort of insurance scheme whereby the mining company, the Government and the employee may each contribute, and the man, say, after about ten years’ service, may claim his insurance and leave the mines. At the present time the mines find it difficult to get suitable young men to join their staffs on account of the fear of phthisis, and it is very necessary, if the mines are to be the factor that they should be, that they should have in their service the best men that they can get. At present parents have strong objection to their sons entering the mines and with good reason. No less than 20,000 men have died from phthisis during the last 20 years and, under present conditions, men have to continue working till they get turned out of the mines with what is practically a burial certificate, and a quick and horrible death staring them in the face. If the men could leave the mines with a certain amount of compensation for loss of health, which must accompany mine working, but without the workers actually contracting phthisis, men would cheerfully come forward for the work and leave it before their health was quite undermined as at present. I would like the Minister to consider this matter during the recess.

I would like to emphasise in regard to what I was saying about the increased output per head underground and the elimination of the hand-drilling native with his pay and maintenance and expense of recruitment, that the mining cost per fathom to the mines has gone down very much. I would also like to refer to another matter and that is in regard to osmiridium and iridium. In a very short time we are going to be in the position of almost controlling the world’s supply of these commodities. Iridium is indispensable in the making of steel industry. It was greatly used during the war for hardening shells and that sort of thing. South Africa here again seems to be exceedingly blessed in having an apparently inexhaustible supply of a mineral which is used in very minute quantities; but for which there is world wide demand. We, who are anxious to build up an iron and steel industry, have at our command a commodity for which the rest of the steel world is really starving. I hope we shall go ahead on lines of independence and that we shall not hand ourselves over to the interests which have so far managed to conserve to themselves, for exploitation, most of the country’s assets. I am not going to say much about State mining, because I see the Government have made up their mind, but I would very much like to see the Government make a venture in State mining; apart from the socialistic principle of having our own mines for our own profit there is a great deal to be said for making a start with State mining in the Springs district. The Department could there conduct experiments in methods of ventilation and workability of regulations ; could find out many things desirable and could extend their training schools there. It would be a practical check under State control of all mining theory and data and would at the same time yield profit and add to revenue. The hon. member for Kimberley (Sir Ernest Oppenheimer) says ne finds difficulty in getting skilled miners, but I find there are numerous skilled miners out of a job. If, as is apparent since the period of initial examination, (1916), the working life of a miner is extended from what used to be less than seven years up to an indefinite period of sixteen years and over, there will be more miners available and seeking jobs. The right hon. member for Standerton (Gen. Smuts) told us how the Rand mines were dwindling. This is a distressing position which must give us pause and make us think hard as to what is going to replace the vanishing field of employment that we have to-day. I am not so much concerned with the profits that are made, but I am very much concerned with the position of the working people and the small commercial businesses who are dependent on these mines for their livelihood. I do not envy any millionaire the millions he gets out of the mines, but I do want to see as much of those millions as possible devoted to distribution as wages amongst our own folk and thereby to the setting up of homes in this country on a decent standard of living and so to stabilize our national and social life that we shall have succeeded in putting the civilized population on a basis that will endure for all time.

With reference to my motion to delete this vote of £1,200 for the Imperial Institute section, I have no wish to carry it to a division if I can get the assurance from the Government that our South African Geological Society will be restored to its £240 a year, by granting them the additional £180 which they suffered reduction in a mistaken attempt at economy by the late Government. The Government "should not contribute £12,000 a year to this Institute, and thus send our money overseas when there is little or no practical benefit for it ; but if I can get the assurance asked for I do not wish to press this matter any further.

The hon. member for Pori Elizabeth (South) (Sir William Macintosh) asked me about the trade commissioner for Kenya. He is in Nairobi. I do not know where the hon. member got his complaint from, that I should have stated that Zanzibar was the capital of Kenya. I do not think I have been guilty of such a geographical solecism, if I may so call it. I have been in Zanzibar several times and I do not think I have ever confused it with the capital of Kenya. The hon. member and also the hon. member for Cape Town (Harbour) (Maj. G. B. van Zyl) and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) have raised the question of the difference in the salaries, and allowances for officers’ expenses, of the trade commissioners in America, in London and on the Continent. One must allow for the extent of country that they have to travel over, and allow for the difference between America and Canada on the one hand and the Continent on the other. The trade commissioner in London has practically a very small geographical area and practically carries on only in London, whereas the others are constantly moving about. As regards America the figures are by no means fixed yet. It may be that we shall have to raise the allowance, I hope not by much, but we certainly do not intend to abandon our effort there. So far my information has been quite encouraging, and the appointment on the Continent has been amply justified. It must be borne in mind that the trade commissioners were put under my department for the very purpose of having co-ordination, and that is my answer to the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (South) (Sir, William Macintosh) where he put me the question why the vote did not appear under that of the High Commissioner. For the rest it is simply a question of bookkeeping, and I will go into the matter whether it is desirable that the figures should come under those of the High Commissioner. As regards Kenya, I must say that there is some room for doubt as to whether the retention of the trade commissioner there is justified, and I will go into that matter. I appreciate the warnings the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) has given me, and that is a matter I have thought of myself. But I am quite certain that it is very desirable to go on cultivating trade relations with Kenya, even if we send a man up there periodically. Then we come to the Cinderella Mine and the Government is asked to guarantee the debentures. Why should the State guarantee them ; on what principle should the State be called upon? Where are you going to draw the line? We have a bill on the order paper which I intend to put through, which will tighten up a section of the gold law. Certainly where a property is lying idle and it is to the interest of the State that it should be worked, and a reasonable effort is being made to bring the parties together, the State should consider whether it should have recourse to the compulsory provisions of the gold law. I am sorry that the hon. member for Boksburg (Mr. McMenamin) has reason to be dissatisfied with the inactivity of the Government regarding mining development. The hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) admitted that there had been no development during the last eight years. We have been in power during the past 18 months. The fact remains that we have quite recently disposed of over 500 claims of the Crown Mines, with reference to which the Minister of Defence gave an explanation this afternoon ; and as regards the Sub-Nigel we have disposed of 2,500 claims and as to Geduld East we have had tenders twice but they have been unsatisfactory. The Government has not been saying that its attitude is non-possumus. If tenders are at all reasonable the Government will act upon them, but I want to tell the hon. member for Springs (Mr. Allen) that he is mistaken that I last year said that under no circumstances would the Government consider State mining. What I said was that the Government would give no undertaking to embark upon State mining when it was a matter to embark upon with great circumspection—one could not conceive of circumstances on which the Government would embark on State mining, but certainly the actual policy of the Government is to exhaust every means) of getting reasonable offers from private enterprise. I do not for a moment condemn a priori State mining—it is possible circumstances may arise—but to my mind they have not yet arisen.

*The hon. member for Winburg (Dr. van der Merwe) asked me with regard to the Commission of Enquiry as to the supply of books. The commission was appointed to enquire into the supply of books to the various Government departments, and if the hon. member will approach me privately I will investigate the matter, and give him the information that is available. The hon. member for Lydenburg (Mr. Nieuwenhuize) asked what we intended doing in connection with platinum, and a proclamation of platinum fields. I can refer the hon. member to the amendment Bill on the Transvaal Precious and Base Metals Act, 1908, which is on the order paper. He will see that Clause 2 provides that the State will be in the position to grant claims or blocks of ground, and that will occur if the clause is passed. One of our greatest difficulties last year was that we had to avoid pegging rushes. If we had thrown open claims for pegging last year, then it would have led to a frightful rush of peggers, and that would have been very undesirable. My policy in connection with the platinum fields and new discoveries, as well as for the gold areas, is that a portion of the mineral riches of the land must be retained for the State. Our finances must be strengthened from the source, and it is no more than right for the State to have a part of the mineral riches. Therefore, the Government will consider whether the areas will be thrown open in blocks for purpose of leases or for the purpose of pegging. I must say, my own view is that the ground should not be thrown open for pegging, but we should go in for a system of leases, and the Government will probably follow that policy. The policy which we followed last year, not to permit pegging, is also justified because, after the terrible “boom” to which the hon. member has referred, we find that public feeling became much calmer with regard to the platinum riches. Then the hon. member for Vredefort (Mr. Munnik) and, I think, the hon. member for Hope Town (Dr. Stals) as well, made the remark that it was desirable to have an under-secretary-ship for the Industrial Department. What is there, as I have already said, in a name? The fact is that the Board of Trade and Industries is now organized in such a way that, although it is not official, does not act in the form, but practically in reality as a separate department, and the board is in the closest and most direct connection with the Minister himself, and thus deals with him about all important matters. It is, however, a matter which I will go into during the recess. The development of base metals and of our trade, especially with America, are things which suggest great possibilities. I have a report from Mr. Louw, our Trade Commissioner in America, which is very encouraging, and if we only obtain a trade in base metals and minerals with America, then his appointment would by that alone be fully justified. Then the hon. member for Vredefort asked that we should appoint a grading board in connection with base metals and minerals. We have Mr. Jordaan, one of the mine inspectors, specially appointed since his return from Wembley who, while in England, visited various companies and firms who buy base metals and minerals and also visited the continent of Europe to occupy himself exclusively with the organization and co-ordination of the supply of base metals and minerals in the Union and the marketing of them. The hon. member for Vredefort also asked me that there should be control in the refineries. That is true, so far as I know the history of platinum, and it is only recently—because it is quite a new thing in South Africa—that the people who refine platinum have practically had a monopoly in platinum. They buy the article, the raw material, and they refine it, and by reason of the fact that the raw material, the article containing the platinum, is valueless—it is even useless to mines—unless it can be refined, the three or four refineries in Europe have practically got a monopoly. Now it has been suggested to me to consider whether we can establish our own refinery in South Africa, but we must, in addition, have a reduction process. Even that reduction process has not yet been quite settled for our ore. But when it is reduced it still has to be refined and it we establish our own refinery in the Union we should still have to have a reduction process. If we want to take steps to establish refineries, then we must also-take steps to obtain the secret of the reduction process.

Attention was drawn to the fact that the vote of £4,000 for mining development was wholly inadequate. I quite agree that it is almost farcical, but we have got to take into consideration our financial condition, and that is the amount that, under all the circumstances, we fixed, and considered that that was the limit to which we could go. As regards the grading of base minerals, I have stated that Mr. Jordaan is going into that matter, and there is, as a matter of fact, an attempt being made at Bandolierskop to grade corundum. Somebody asked me what was the position of the Board of Medical Appeal, and who were the personnel. There are three members. The chairman is Dr. A. M. Moll, of Johannesburg, who is a part time member. The arrangement is that he devotes a certain part of every day—I believe, usually the morning, up to about 2 o’clock in the afternoon, to the board’s work. Then there are two full-time members, Drs. Smith and Truter, who were senior members, or fairly senior members of the Medical Bureau ; men of long standing and great experience, and it was felt when the select committee sat on the Miners’ Phthisis Bill last year, that to take three men from outside who necessarily, in the nature of the case, could not be supposed to have the experience and expert knowledge and advice that a member of the bureau had, would not be fair towards the Medical Bureau, and that it would be unsound ; and I think it was the general feeling. I indicated at that time, as chairman of that committee, that it would be wise to divorce permanently two members of the Medical Bureau from that bureau—they cease to be members—and to appoint them to the Medical Board of Appeal, and to appoint a man from outside either as full-time chairman or part-time chairman. The reason why we appointed Dr. Moll as part-time chairman was that there was a feeling that there might not be sufficient work for the Medical Board of Appeal. Up to now, that feeling has been falsified. It may prove to be true in the future. With regard to the treatment of natives, which the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) asked me about. He referred me to two sections of the Miners’ Phthisis Act, which I have not forgotten. I had intended answering his question to-night. The sections are 34 (3) and 49. The report which I have from the Medical Bureau, dated 20th April, 1926, says—

This is a matter which, I think, every one of us in this House appreciated last year when it was necessary to enquire into this examination of natives. It is my intention, during the recess, to visit Johannesburg, get into touch with the Native Affairs Department and make a personal inquiry to see what progress has been made. Personally, I don’t know that natives who are suffering from phthisis are sent home to avoid payment of compensation, or that they are being encouraged to evade medical examination, but I have a confidential communication, and I will inquire into the matter. I don’t want to impute anything. The Electricity Control Board consists of the Government Alining Engineer, the Government Legal Adviser and a third member. The board controls the issue of licences. As regards the Imperial Institute, I sympathize with the remarks of the hon. member for Pretoria West (Mr. Hay). As at present advised, I am not prepared to submit the vote next year. I think we shall be doing much better if we provide for our geological society. When the Diamond Control Bill came before this House I said we were merely taking powers, and if the hour were not late I could tell the hon. member the very specific benefits which have resulted from the application of that Act. The mere existence of the measure has had an excellent effect, and we have a very satisfactory state of affairs in consequence of it. I said last session that if we appointed a diamond control board it would mean that the State would have to provide about £5,000,000 or £6,000,000 in case of a diamond crisis. As long as things are going satisfactorily it is not the policy of the Government to appoint such a board—I think it would be wrong to do so. As to the sanatorium at Springhill, it is run entirely by the Chamber of Mines for phthisis patients. The Government contributes £5,000. It is a sort of charitable institution, and there is no reason to think that it is run otherwise than on humane and proper lines. Under these circumstances I do not quite see the necessity at present, at all events, of insisting on Government representation on the board. A survey of inland waters is being carried out through the Western Province along the coastal river system as far as Natal, and the report, which it is hoped will be published very shortly, deals with 100 rivers, streams and larger dams and the class of fish, including trout and even sea salmon, which are suitable for placing in them.

*The hon. member for Riversdale (Mr. Badenhorst) asked me a question in connection with the Fisheries Commission. A small commission was appointed last year to go into the whole matter and to arrange for a proper coastal survey and other work in connection with sheltering fishing boats at suitable places along the coast. As stated last year it would be easy to expend a large sum of money on the matter without our getting sufficient result or benefit thereby. The members of the commission are Mr. Mansergh, recently secretary to the Cape Provincial Administration, Mr. Nicholson, the harbour engineer of Cape Town, Captain Lee of the Railways and Harbours Department, and Dr. Gilchrist the marine expert. The commission is now engaged visiting various parts of the coast and an important and valuable report is expected at the end of the year. It will, therefore, depend on the report of the commission and of the decision of the department —because the department is not necessarily bound by the report—what use will be made of the sum of money.

I think the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) asked me about deep sea trawling.

No, about the biological survey.

I have already given information as regards the fishing harbour survey, the inland water survey, and there remains the crawfish survey. This survey was started by the crawfish canning companies who were anxious to obtain reliable data as to the movements of crawfish at various times of the year. The Government is now continuing the survey in order to extend the period of observation. The cost of this work has been considerably reduced for the current year by the substitution of shore observation for the more difficult and more expensive observation afloat. The hon. member (Mr. Close) also asked me about the balance of the vote. The balance of the vote which is not expended in toto is returned to the consolidated revenue fund.

I want to know how much of the £10,000 has been used.

I will get the information for the hon. member.

You have not told us what you are going to do as regards carrying out the suggestions in the report as to the inland waters.

Surely the hon. member will appreciate that I must first see the report.

I presume you have read it?

I have stated that I have not yet got the report. The report is expected shortly. The hon. member for Rondebosch has asked me about the trawling survey. The trawler “Pickle” has during the past twelve months, after undergoing some extensive repairs, carried out observations northward from Saldanha Bay to the Orange River mouth, also a series of observations off the Natal coast and observations off Walvis Bay. Extensive trawlable areas have been found and the evidence goes to show that the fishing contents of these areas are very great. The report on last year’s survey has now been printed and may be expected to be available at any time. The hon. member for Germiston (Mr. G. Brown) asked me about the state of trade. That is a matter that the board has been busy on for some four or five months. It is of a very complicated and difficult nature and they hope to have, perhaps before our prorogation, an interim report on this question. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) asked me about the Trade Commissioner on the Continent and his resignation. I would ask the hon. member not to take notice of rumours. He is our trade commissioner and he is there still.

Is he not resigning?

No, he has not sent in his resignation. The hon. member (Mr. Blackwell) has also asked about the choice between Rotterdam and Milan. I spoke to Mr. Pienaar about this. I met him in Paris and his view was—and it is a view which has been acted upon—that as regards Holland and Germany and those parts we had achieved what we wanted. Our trade was going on all right in those parts. Therefore, he had to seek new fields. I do not share the view of the hon. member for Hopetown (Dr. Stals) that our chief trade is going to be only with the northern parts of Europe. I look upon Italy as holding out very good prospects for the extension of our trade relationships, and as being the gateway of a large hinterland. If at any time it is desirable to shift the office back to Rotterdam or somewhere else the Government will certainly consider it. As regards the observation that there is no thorough audit over expenditure in these offices, the same would apply to, say, the High Commissioner in London. The very fact that they are far away may detract from the value of the audit, but what can one do under the circumstances ? They are officers abroad. The hon. member asked me also about a magistrate’s court case in Johannesburg. The individual against whom that case was brought was not appointed as either chairman or a member of the Phthisis Medical Board of Appeal. It is rather amusing, because it was strongly urged upon me that I should appoint him. It has been imputed to us that we are under the influence of certain parties and certain people ; well, he was not appointed. Somebody asked me about the Argentine competition as regards fruit. I have a leter here from our Trade Commissioner in America. He says—

Mr. Louw, according to this report, has the greatest hope of getting the fruit embargo removed in the United States. He has already succeeded in getting the embargo on wool removed as regards Canada. He also sets forth our prospects as regards our base minerals and metals in, America. The hon. member for Cape Town (Harbour) (Maj G. B. van Zyl) asked me about a sum of money placed at the disposal of the committee in London to advertise Empire products. I have no information about it at all. It appears there was an intention to appoint such a committee, but they decided to abandon it, and what has happened since I do not know. The hon. member for Durban (Berea) (Mr. Henderson) asked me about the publication of the board’s reports. Of course where taxation proposals or new customs dues or anything like that are proposed, the publication will not be able to be effected where the revenue of the State may be involved. Otherwise, our policy will be to publish these things as soon as possible. I think the board has borne it in mind, but for the satisfaction of hon. members, if they desire the board in each report to specifically state what the effect of recommendations acted upon will be upon the prices to the consumers, then it will be done. I certainly think it is desirable that it should be. As regards coal grading, that is proceeding satisfactorily in Natal and the Transvaal. There have been no complaints concerning it. The question was raised by the hon. member for Worcester (Mr. Heatlie) as regards the reports of trade commissioners, and I have here what is tantamount to a report from Mr. Louw, and it is numbered No. 4, but there are certain parts of it which certainly could not be published. There is no secrecy about it, however, I will see that instructions are conveyed to him that he must draw his reports in such a way that if there is anything confidential he should embody that in something separate and draw the report itself so that it can be published. I am glad to see the desire on the part of the public to see what these reports state. I come now to the hon. member for Brakpan (Mr. Waters-ton). Well, as regards the mining regulations, I may say the hon. member was a member of the commission appointed by the Government to go into the mining regulations. The question of the application and the carrying out of these regulations, is one that has given me considerable thought, anxiety and trouble, and I must say that I am convinced that these regulations are not carried out properly. I have been away for some time ; and when I get back to Johannesburg I shall make a special point of this. I have discussed it with the Government mining engineer, and pressed upon him that his officials apply the mining regulations as much as possible. The hon. member referred to surprise visits. My information is— and I visited several mines during the recess — and it is my impression, that it is practically impossible to carry out a surprise visit. You go to a mine, and they know everything about you. Sometimes it takes some time to get from the surface to a certain level, and before you get there they know you are coming, and they can obviate unpleasant things or unpleasant discoveries. I do not say that that is no reason for attempting to apply the regulations as thoroughly as possible. We are also making provision in the Estimates for extra sub-inspectors. The Government mining engineer has taken steps to revise the regulations, and they are lying on my table, and have been lying there since I have been back, but owing to public exigencies I have not been able to go through them. It is my endeavour to give both sides—the Chamber of Mines, as representing the industry—and the workers in the mines—a chance of being heard, and I will do so in the case of the regulations, I do not consider it more than just. As regards the eight hours day, provision is made in the Works and Mines Act for a 48-hour week, and an eight hours day. I do not know whether the hon. member alleges that they have been exceeded. I would suggest to the hon. member that when I am back in Pretoria that I be present one day at a conference, where I shall have the Government mining engineer, the inspectors, and sub-inspectors, and have a small conferenoe, and discuss what steps can be taken to enforce these mining regulations, and to make surprise visits with some measure of success. As regards the mines in South West Africa to which an hon. member referred, I shall enquire into them. The hon. member for Parktown (Mr. Rockey), asked me whether the expenses attaching to the phthisis appeal board were justified. The board has dealt with 500 appeals and there are about 300 still pending. I have a letter from the chairman to say he thinks they will be kept busy indefinitely for a long time. Up to now they have had any amount of work, which has been lightened somewhat, but there are still 300 appeals, and appeals come along day by day even with fresh cases. So that I think the expenditure is fully justified.

As regards the status of our trade commissioners on the continent and in America, and direct access by them to the Governments of those countries, I need hardly say that I feel that that ought not to exist, and I hope that steps will soon be taken, at any rate, not later than shortly after the coming Imperial Conference, to rectify this state of things. I am absolutely in sympathy with the view that if we send representatives to any country in the world, it should not be necessary for them to approach the Governments of those countries through the British Ambassador. The Trade Commissioner of Canada in America has direct access, and there is no reason whatsoever why our Trade Commissioner should not also have it.

As regards the request of the member for Boksburg (Mr. McMenamin) and, I think, the member for Brakpan (Mr. Waterston), that I should consider, during the recess, a compensation scheme for miners who have not contracted phthisis, but who have worked a certain period in the mines, and the suggestion of the hon. member for Boksburg that an insurance scheme should be devised, my answer is that I should suggest to him that he first get the miners to agree with the companies. If they can agree among themselves to an insurance scheme, it is time for the State to consider whether it should contribute, and on what basis. We have gone far in the phthisis acts—I do not say we have gone too far—but we have gone a good way, and this is an entirely new principle, and it appears to me that he wants it accumulative, that is in addition to the Miners’ Phthisis Acts.

It won’t apply to the same people.

As I stated last year in presenting that Bill to the House, the De Villiers Commission had found that here was an occupational disease, and that it was elementary and axiomatic that an industry that was responsible for the incidence of that occupational disease should compensate, and that is the only ground for compensation. If you have an insurance scheme, why should it be confined to miners? They are not the only workers. The legislature has passed various acts with a view to occupational disease. I would throw out the suggestion that if the hon. member wants an insurance scheme the miners should come to an understanding with the employers, and then the Government would consider the matter. The hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel) asked if the Government are considering the establishment of an iron industry by guaranteeing the interest on the capital required. The interests on whose behalf he put the question have put their case to me, and I have told them during the last eighteen months that the Government has an entirely open mind on the whole question and has arrived at no decision on the point. It is an enormous question—it is something like the institution of a diamond control board, only I hope it would prove less risky The State will be expected to put a vast sum of money into the concern, and the Government has not at all made up its mind. We have discussed it and given it our earnest consideration.

This places the pioneers of this industry in an awkward position—it is a sword of Damocles hanging over them. At any moment the Government may support the establishment of a new industry by guaranteeing the interest and thereby seriously affect those people who are making an honest effort to try and establish an iron industry. All we ask is that we should be given a chance to show what we can do, and if we fail the Government can consider the advisability of supporting any other scheme which may be initiated.

I am sorry, but surely the hon. member (Mr. Nel) does not seriously suggest that, if it becomes clear that it is in the interests of the State that certain steps should be taken, even involving the expenditure or investment of a big sum of money, the State should refrain simply because there are certain vested interests.

Surely you ought to consider the vested interests The question put by my hon. friend (Mr. Nel) is, that it is reported that you are going to guarantee the interest on the capital.

Well, we have decided nothing.

With leave of committee, amendment proposed by Mr. McMenamin withdrawn.

Amendment proposed by Mr. Waterston put and negatived.

Amendment proposed by Mr. Hay put; upon which the committee divided.

As fewer than ten members (viz., Mr. Hay) voted in favour of the amendment, the chairman declared the amendment negatived.

Vote, as printed, put and agreed to.

On Vote 26, “Union Education ”, £650,240.

On the motion of the Minister of Education it was agreed to report progress and ask leave to sit again.