The Minister promised us the Loan Estimates shortly, but now it is the 17th, and they are not yet on the table. How can the hon. member ask us to consider them if we have not time to do so ?

They are in the hands of the printers, who are being rushed.

That is no excuse.

We cannot get the work done by the printers. It is not customary for the Loan Estimates to be on the table much earlier.

I do not agree with my hon, friend. The former Minister certainly gave more time than the present Minister of Finance.

The Minister of Justice is not here. I wanted to ask him the reason for this change. In the Act as we passed it, there was provision that when steps had to be taken to ascertain in the case of women whether they had any distinguishing marks, the examination was to be done by the wardress. Apparently a change has been made, and in the case of women there is to be no examination at all. What is the reason for the distinction between the two sexes ?

The hon. member will remember that this matter evoked a good deal of discussion in the House, and I presume hon. Senators think that this exception should be made, and have watered down the drastic requirements in the Bill because they thought these exceptions and provisos should be added.

The hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) cannot speak again.

The Minister of Finance, who has replied, says he presumes this has been altered in another place for certain reasons. That is hardly sufficient. Surely the Minister of Justice should be here to give information to this House on the alteration which has been made, otherwise how can we adopt it?

He is in another place.

I move That the debate be adjourned.

seconded. Motion put and Mr. Blackwell called for a division.

Upon which the House divided:

I think the Minister ought to give some explanation about this amendment. According to this, women are exempted from the penalties, and we know very well that the women of to-day, rather than have any sex distinctions, want to be on actual equality with men. Here is a direct distinction between men and women.

It is not the Government’s amendment ; it is the Senate’s amendment.

That has nothing to do with us. The Minister must have accepted it. We ought to know why the Minister has accepted it.

Move the deletion, then, if you want it out.

The clause, as amended, says that if a man is found not guilty his finger-prints are to be destroyed. Why not have a policy of taking finger-prints only after a man has been found guilty? I would suggest that until we have a very clear explanation from the Minister as to why this amendment has been accepted, we should not pass the clause.

Well, please yourself.

I intend pleasing myself.

I would make an appeal to the Minister. It cannot do much harm if we allow this matter to stand over until some other orders are disposed of. We do not want to be unreasonable in this case, but, in view of the absence of the Minister of Justice, I think it is only fair to ask the Minister to allow this Bill to stand over until other orders have been disposed of.

Does not my hon. friend see that the request is an extremely reasonable one? To ask the House to pass an amendment which has been accepted in another place, without the Minister, who is responsible for the Bill, being able to explain to this House the reasons for that amendment, and what it actually means, seems to me an extraordinary procedure. We are asking for the reasons for this amendment from the responsible Minister, the Ministers at present on the benches not being able to give the reasons which actuated the Minister of Justice in accepting this amendment in another place. Under the circumstances, one can only protest against the attitude which the Government are taking up in regard to this matter.

With leave of the House, I would like to say that if the hon. member will move that this matter stand over until other orders have been disposed of, I would suggest that the House should agree. These are all minor amendments and self-explanatory.

I move—

I do not think it is competent to move that at this stage. A motion of that nature should have been made before the order was called on. Now it must either be disposed of or adjourned. Perhaps I had better put the first amendment and take a vote upon that. I now put the first amendment to Clause 2.

Amendment put and negatived.

On the motion of Mr. Jagger, debate adjourned, to be resumed to-morrow.

I move, as an unopposed motion—

I do not intend or wish to delay the passing of this Bill through the House. Therefore, I have not objected to the third reading being taken now, but before it passes finally from this House I would like to say a few words in regard to the remarks of the Minister of Finance on the second reading stage of this Bill. At that time he made some reflections upon the conduct or attitude of the Durban Corporation in connection with this Bill, and more especially in relation to the collection of the licences at the end of 1925. These remarks I considered somewhat unfair and misleading as regards the attitude and intention of the Durban Corporation and, while I took exception to some of them at the time in a mild way, the Corporation themselves have taken a much stronger view of the position than I did. Before we pass the third reading of this Bill, I would like to give the Corporation’s views in this matter, so as to show their real attitude, and how they have been misrepresented and to some extent, misunderstood. The Mayor writes—

I am sorry to interrupt the hon, member (Mr. Henderson), but the letter that he is reading deals with a debate which took place in this House.

I may say that I thoroughly endorse the Mayor’s remarks, and I am practically giving my own views in this connection. I am putting forward this letter in support of the views that I placed before the House at the second reading stage of the Bill.

The rule is that news-paper remarks and also letters dealing with debates in the House are not permitted to be read in the House.

Well, how can I present it to the House ?

The hon, member can give his own version without reading the letter.

I am trying to do that. The fact that the Minister has agreed, or has been forced, to bring in another law to remedy the previous law, shows that the Durban Corporation was perfectly right. This has been a very serious matter for the Town Council of Durban, and it means that by this action of the Government in making the Bill retrospective Durban has to find approximately £60,000 to meet this year’s budget and to provide against loss of revenue next year. There will be a deficit of £30,000 on the budget this year. The Corporation have felt very deeply the remarks of the [Minister, and are anxious that their attitude and position should be rightly understood by this House and the country generally.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

I move—

The amendment intended by this Bill is small, but important to get the various native councils into working. Under section 6 of the Act of 1920 quite a number of capacities are granted to the council, but unfortunately there are now natives in certain areas, I think particularly in Natal, who would like to have a council, but unfortunately arc not able to exercise the capacities under clause 6, and in this Bill, therefore, it is provided that in such a case if the Native Affairs Commission recommends that some of the powers should not be exercised without the approval of the Minister, that the Governor-General may say, at the time the council is appointed, which of the capacities it shall exercise. With the Minister’s approval, I think it necessary to have something like that, as the councils cannot now be created, because in time they will be hardly capable of doing it all.

Is this going to facilitate the extension of these councils in these territories ?

That is exactly why. It is found almost impossible to give to the natives, the councils they do want, but they are not competent to exercise these powers.

How many of these new councils is it the intention within a reasonable period of time to establish ?

They are being established.

To have some check; they being in a state of tutelage?

Exactly.

May I venture to hope that the Prime Minister will do nothing to force these councils on communities which do not desire to adapt themselves to the council system ? He is well aware that in a large portion of Zululand and Natal the tribal system prevails, and in the opinion of the best judges that is the best form of government for the natives who at present live under it. I hope the Prime Minister will recognize this, and bear in mind the diversity of system which exists in the Union, and not unnecessarily force upon a tribal community such as I have mentioned the council system.

That is quite right.

I should like to associate myself with the remarks made by the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick), and I am sure the Prime Minister will realize that while this council is very well adapted to certain areas it is very ill-adapted to other districts. Affairs in Zululand are such that these councils would retard the progress they are making today rather than advance it. I hope the Prime Minister will bear in mind the state of progress to which the natives have attained.

I think hon. members from Natal are unduly afraid of the council system, which has been gradually introduced into the native territories. Many natives-at first opposed it, but eventually found it operated in their interests, and to-day the natives would be the first to fight now against that system being taken away. It is only 30 years since Pondo-land was annexed to the Cape Colony, and I do not think Natal members would contend that the Pondos are more advanced than the Zulus and other natives in Natal, yet a council has been established there, and is at present operating most satisfactorily. At the last annual meeting of the “Bunga” at Umtata, representatives from Natal attended on the invitation of the Government, and were, I understand, much impressed by the council system and the Transkeian administration generally. I think the Government is to be commended for its action in trying to extend this system of Government. I think all responsible Europeans should do their best to make it popular amongst the natives, as it is in the truest and best interests of the native population.

Bill read a second time ; House to go into committee on the Bill to-morrow.

I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture what he is going to do with the report of the Egg Commission. Then I would also like to know what he is going to do with Groot Constantia wine farm, which was burnt down recently. All the time it has been in the hands of the Government— previous Governments as well as this Government—it has lost money. It is just about time that the loss was cut, and the farm sold or leased. There should be no reason why we should be losing money on it.

I thank the Minister for having put a sum on the Estimates for a matter to which I drew his attention last year —namely, for the education of the children of those employed on the Guano Islands. I should like to ask how is the amount going to be allocated, and from what date will it take effect.

We have heard a good deal from hon. members opposite about the Vote and we have long awaited an acknowledgment of the services of the Minister, and to hear one of them thank him for good work done in the interests of the farmers. Now I want to thank the Minister on behalf of the House and the farmers for the way in which he has attacked the locust plague. We see that there is £10,000 on the Estimates this year for that purpose, We are thankful to Providence, but no one can deny that the Minister has done much to put an end to the locust plague, and we are glad that we are finally rid of it. But there is an aftermath to which I hope the Minister will give his attention. The western Free State farmers have made great sacrifices in fighting the plague and there are still a few hard cases where people have suffered serious damage. I can mention one instance of a Mr. Jacob. The people suffered loss in execution of their duty. We have had many droughts and sometimes it was necessary to spray the whole farm and some camps more than once, so that damage could not be obviated. I hope therefore that the Minister will see that nobody suffers. I know of one case where a man lost more than half his cattle. Another point is that I should like to know whether the plague may soon recur. If it should, I hope the Minister will give his attention to the position of the district and senior officials. It seems to me that the public in this regard also need information. It appears from the report of the Auditor-General that a senior official received £1,175 for nine months, and another £900 in eight months, which works out at £112 per month, and there is a case of a district official who got £957 in ten months, or £95 per month. There was another case in Boshof about which I would like an explanation. Fourteen hundred swarms of locusts were exterminated in that district £4,400 was spent and thirty two officials employed, but I see that the district official got £416 in two months. I should like an explanation. As these officials got £416 or £208 per month, I should like to know whether the district official was only engaged for the two months he was busy destroying locusts or whether at other times he had to do work in the office. If that amount is paid for only two months’ work, it is a large sum. It is in the public interest that we should know this in case of another locust plague. What kind of work did the officials do? Did they have other duties?

On March 12th the Minister promised to take into consideration the appointment of a veterinary surgeon at East London. The need is very great, East London being perhaps the most thickly populated stock district in the Union, and it is a physical impossibility for the veterinary surgeon stationed at King William’s Town to do justice to East London. Now that scab inspection is devolving upon the veterinary department, it is all the more reason why skilled men should be provided. There have been many losses of valuable stock in the East London division, which might easily have been avoided if the services of a veterinary surgeon had been available.

I am sorry the Minister did not reply to the question I put the other day with regard to the improvement of dairy cattle throughout South Africa. The dairy industry is going downhill. In his reply the Minister said he wanted to know what Natal had done. Well, let him visit Maritzburg in June when the Royal Agricultural Society holds its show, and he will see the finest display of cattle in South Africa, and when he is in Natal he will also be able to see some of the largest creameries in the Union. The reason why the farmers are in despair financially is because there is no improvement in the cattle market. We have 8,000 yearling bulls on the stud book, their average value being £30 a head. They would be of service to 400,000 cows, so that within five years we could double our dairy output and then be in a position to compete with Australasia, but if nothing is done South African conditions will become worse. In regard to east coast fever in my district, the Minister’s policy has broken down, because he has pinned his faith to quarantine instead of dipping, although the latter renders cattle-immune. Farmers are put to great expense because of unnecessary quarantining, as owing to their draught oxen being confined they have to purchase donkeys and mules. I appeal to farmers opposite to help me in this matter. Farms outside the in-contact area should not be quarantined. The inspectors should travel by motor so that they can cover six times the distance they would be able to if they rode horses.

The hon. member for Boshof (Mr. van Rensburg) thanked the Minister for the way in which he had handled the locusts, but he seems to forget that in consequence of the way in which the Act is now being administered many farmers in Bechuanaland are being sacrificed. It is strongly felt that the Bechuanaland farmers are being sacrificed for the benefit of the rest of the Union. For about two months of each year during the past four years the farmers had to kill locusts in ploughing time without remuneration. I can understand many people thanking the Minister, but I doubt whether the Bechuanaland farmers are grateful to him. The farmers there, and I, are not responsible for the plague. The locusts come from the Kalahari on to my farm, and every person in the Union is as responsible for their destruction as I am, and we have to pay the same taxes, and on behalf of the Bechuanaland farmers I protest against their being sacrificed for the rest of the population. A great deal has been made of a senior official’s expenses being £1,175 in one year. If I give the House the figures for the locust officer for Bechuanaland, hon. members will not have any further objection. He supervised no less than 35,000 square miles of the Union, and a further 34,000 miles in the Kalahari, thus in all 70,000 square riles. He had no telephone facilities, and in twelve months he travelled 18,215 miles, no less than 4,618 miles with the head official who visited the district, and which was also put to his account. He was paid 1s. per mile for his motor, and I know from experience that one can hardly do nine miles per gallon of petrel in the Kalahari. In view of this the amount of £1,100 is small, and I do not believe he put any of it into his own pocket. I am thankful to him for devoting day and night to the destruction of locusts. The whole matter was in his hands, and he saved the rest of the Union. Another grievance to which the hon. member for Boshof (Mr. van Rensburg) referred was with regard to the division of farms into camps. When locusts are destroyed, the stock remains on the farms, and the farmers are obliged to spray all the camps, so that they have no clean camp so that the stock die as a result of spraying. I know of cases where farmers suffered much damage. In one case 22 milch cows out of 40 died, and the man did not himself spray, but the lorry under State supervision. The supervisor acknowledged that he did not know how much water the tank contained, and took too little, and the farmer lost 22 cows. That was ten months ago, and he has not received a penny compensation.

Who was that ?

De Klerk. In consequence of the complaints of the farmers they in Bechuanaland will be unwilling to kit! locusts, and we should obviate that. Reasonable claims for compensation should be paid.

I would like to ask the Minister if he can give the House an indication as to the position regarding bovine tuberculosis within the borders of the Union. There is a strong feeling in the Eastern Province that cattle are being sent from here into the Eastern Province which are not free from tuberculosis. I have a letter from the City Council of Grahamstown urging that cattle from the Western Province should be subjected to the tuberculin test before being sent to that area for sale. I have seen the Minister's department, but his department suggest that the position has so much improved that they do not think it is necessary to take any steps. I believe the Minister of Public Health has approached the Minister of Agriculture with a view of having the tuberculin test reimposed, but I understand that the Minister of Agriculture hitherto has not been agreeable to that course. This is a very serious matter, especially in regard to dairy stock. If milk cows are going to be sent from any area which is known to have a good deal of tuberculosis, it is a very great danger to the community especially where you have a large number of schools, such as at Grahamstown, as I have mentioned. I would like to know what the position is throughout the Union as regards this matter. I know that some time ago many of us were very much horrified to learn that tuberculosis existed in many parts of the country where it was not even suspected. Before the matter gets too serious, would it not be as well to take steps to eradicate, or at least check any spread of tuberculosis, and I suggest that one way is to reimpose the tuberculin test which used to be in existence some years ago where the disease was known to be prevalent. There is another matter I would like to bring to the Minister’s attention. There is what might almost be termed a strong agitation going on in Bradford to have our wool sent away in all-wool wool-packs. We have not got any real data yet to formulate opinions on, but I would suggest that while it is a fact that these all-wool packs are actually made out of long wools, at the same time we have here an opportunity of encouraging local production and a local industry by having these packs made up in this country. I believe that the real trouble against their use is that the manufacturers want to charge a very big price for these packs, but the buyers promise to make an allowance of one penny per lb. for the wool packed in these packs, but the question is whether that will be done. I would suggest that here is an opportunity of encouraging a legitimate industry—instead of protecting a bastard industry of merely putting together cloth that is made somewhere else—by producing our own needs out of South African grown wools. The next point I would place before the Minister is whether he is aware that at the last Cape Province Agricultural Union Congress, a unanimous resolution was passed urging him to pass a Brands Bill. I would like to tell the Minister that there was very grave disappointment right throughout amongst the progressive farmers at the fact that that Bill was thrown out by the captious obstruction of members opposite.

On that side.

No. I can tell the Minister that what killed that Bill last session was one of his own side moving an amendment that it should be optional in wards in a district. That was moved by Mr. Louw, who is to-day the Trades Commissioner in America. I can assure the Minister that he would have behind him all the progressive farmers in South Africa in pushing on with a Brands Bill as soon as possible. As far as the farmers in the Cape Province are concerned, they want to see small stock also included. I would also urge upon him during the recess to go into the question of a Stock Removal Bill with the Minister of Justice. There is great need for an Act whereby men would not be allowed to move stock about the country without having proper permits to do so. With a Brands Bill and a Stock Removal Bill, I think we would do a great deal to combat this great evil of stock thefts in the Union. There is a deliberate system of stock thieving on a large scale going on, not only on the part of natives, but I am sorry to say that white men are also very much to blame for the amount of stock thieving that is taking place in some parts of the country. I would also like to ask the Minister whether he does not look upon himself as the guardian of the interests of the primary producers, the farmers of the country, and, if he does, will he use his influence in the Cabinet, which I know is great, to see that industries such as the one I am particularly anxious to see fostered, the chicory industry of this country, has his support when it asks for a bit of consideration. That one particular industry has come to the salvation of the ostrich farmers of Alexandria. When ostrich farming ceased to pay, they turned to chicory growing and during the war, when there was a large demand for chicory— the biggest demand that has yet taken place in the Union—the Alexandria district and other parts of South Africa were able to produce sufficient to supply the then vast needs of the country; That industry is a really honest and legitimate one, and has made enormous strides during the last few years both as regards quantity and greatly improved quality. Every ounce of chicory that is required in the Union can be produced within our borders, and not only that, but of a standard of quality equal to that grown in Belgium and Holland. [Time limit.]

When the Minister proceeds to Pietermaritzburg, as suggested by my hon, friend the member for Umvoti (Mr. Deane), to visit the Royal Show and see “the finest cattle that South Africa produces,” I hope he will give some little attention to the working conditions of and the salaries paid to the dip inspectors under the Stock Diseases Act and the sheep inspectors under the Scab Act. These men have sent me a combined petition asking me to draw the Minister’s attention to the salaries paid to them. These are the men who are responsible in this particular district for producing the finest cattle that South Africa can show.

They are all underpaid.

Well, then, I was wondering whether the House would show as much concern for the human element in this connection as it does for the rearing and care of stock. I think it was Dr. Mitchell, the chief officer of the Health Department of the Union, who once said that from every point of view, even that of pounds, shillings and pence, the human stock is the most valuable that any country raises. And I admit that on £20 a month no man or woman is able to rear human stock that will be a credit to South Africa. These men say that they are engaged at a salary of £20 a month without any allowances ; are subject to 24 hours’ notice on either side, and are all full-time workers without any other interests. It would be difficult to find anyone here without other interests. Out of this salary, they have to provide two horses, a saddle and a bridle. The feeding for each horse costs at least £2 10s. a month. That does not include the cost of stable, native groom, saddlery repairs, etc. ; therefore they contend that they have less than £15 with which to pay rent and provide food, clothing and medical services as they become necessary, and owing to the high cost of living—and the Cost of Living Committee appointed last year contend that in this particular district of Natal it is not possible for a man, woman and a family of three to come out properly on less than £25 a month— and yet these men have to endeavour to come out on £15 a month after providing for their horses and so forth. I suggest to the Minister, on their behalf, that he might consider the granting of a horse allowance of £3—a very modest request. I hope the Minister will remember this item when he is considering all the needs in stock requirements in connection with this vote.

Is the Minister aware of the disease which appeared amongst sheep during the great droughts in the midlands, and in the south-western districts, and also in the small and big Karoo ? Among farmers it is known as the water plague. Some people think it is caused through sheep eating the kraal bushes, others that the cause should be looked for in wild worm. As we are not entirely acquainted with these matters and no proper enquiry is made into them, I should be glad if the Minister will have an enquiry made. In time of drought hundreds of sheep die from the disease and if it is caused by the kraal bushes, then we can keep the sheep away from them, if not, we shall know that that is a good feed for stock in time of drought.

I should like to have some explanation from the Minister of his treatment of a young man named J. H. E. Clark, who was awarded a scholarship by this Government, entitling him to three years’ study in America to qualify in field husbandry. One of the terms of the contract, I understand, was that he should, on the completion of his studies, be taken on by the Department of Agriculture for a period of three to five years. He duly completed his studies, and qualified, obtaining high degrees, and returned to this country to implement his contract ; when the Agriculture Department, contrary to the terms of his contract, engaged him as a monthly servant only. This young man, who is South African born, showed his resentment of this treatment by leaving the country. It seems a great pity that a young man of such outstanding ability should be lost to this country, and that America, to which country he has returned, should get the benefit of a training given him at a cost of £600 or £700 to this country. There can be no question as to his ability. He was recommended for this scholarship after serving in the Glen School of Agriculture, by the principal of that institution, who, in recommending him, said that Mr. Clark was an unusually bright student, and had always taken first place in his class; that he was not bilingual in the sense that he could lecture in both languages, but could, no doubt in a specified period, qualify himself to do the work. When he proceeded to America, he first qualified as B.Sc., within the prescribed period of three years. He then asked for an extension of six months to go a step further than he was really required to do under his contract, i.e., to qualify as a master of science. He thought that by doing so he would enhance his value to the Department of Agriculture. In due course he qualified as Master of Science and, in addition, took up another branch, commercial art and design, thinking that by doing so he would further enhance his value to the Department of Agriculture when he returned. In that connection, in an open competition in which 7,000 students were entitled to take part, he gained two first prizes for poster work and received mention for other illustrative work. He is exceptionally talented, and it seems a great pity that the department should have treated him in such a way as to cause him to leave the country of his birth and return to America, where his abilities are well-known and appreciated, and where he had no difficulty in obtaining employment. He was in point of fact offered permanent employment in America before he returned to this country, but recognizing his obligations to this Government, declined such employment. During a long vacation he obtained employment with a firm of advertising agents in America to assist him to pay his expenses. His worth was soon recognized by that firm, which offered him permanent employment which, as I have said, recognizing his obligations to this Government, he declined. I hope the Minister, when replying, will offer some explanation of his treatment of this young man.

I notice that £6,000 appeared on the estimates last year for the eradication of citrus cancer, and the same amount appears again this year. I should like to ask the Minister whether there has been no reduction in this disease and, if there was not, where it prevailed most. I hope we shall now get rid of this dreaded pest. Then I want to ask the Minister if it is not possible, by means of regulations, to make the spreading of diseases among plants more rare, and to prevent the people from being careless in the way they deal with the matter. I called the attention of his department to the fact that there is a disease among tomatoes in the low veld, and the farmers are very careless about it, so that the disease is spread right through the district. Then I want to ask the Minister whether lie knows that in two or three places in Barberton East Coast fever has broken out again. We were for years practically free from it, and now suddenly it has come into our district again like a bolt from the blue. Where from?

From Swaziland.

I should like to know where it comes from. As we know, the first case occurred in January in Pietersburg, then in Sabie, and now in the middle of the district. What is the position in Swaziland? In connection with what the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (North) (Mr. Strachan) said, I also wish to urge that the salary or allowance of the dipping inspectors should be increased. We depend to a great extent on the work which they do with regard to East Coast fever, whether we are troubled with it or not. The veterinary surgeons do their part, but in the main we depend on the dipping inspectors, and I can assure the Minister that a salary of £20 a month is very small in the low veld. It may be true that there are other people who are only waiting an opportunity to take their place, but that is no reason for paying them too little. For a good official that amount is too small. I know of a case, I can mention the name, where there is such an inspector at a far away place like Kaapsehoop. He is far from the railway, and the cost of living is much higher there than it is near Pretoria. The country there is mountainous, and he must have two horses well shod. Many are able to do that for themselves, but then they require the tools. I think the least the Minister can give those people is an allowance for their horses, which they must keep in good condition. As the Minister knows, they did not only do the work of cattle inspectors last year, but also of sheep inspectors. When they come to kafir kraals they had to inspect the kafir goats. These people work hard from Monday to Saturday, and often have to go out on Sundays to finish their work. Therefore, I appeal to the Minister to increase the allowance.

I would like to refer to the question of Groot Constantia. I am sorry that I disagree with the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) on his view of the matter. I am keen on Groot Constantia being kept from the point of view of its historical associations, and I hope the Minister of Public Works will see, when we come to restoring it, that the job is done properly. It is quite true that the wine farm has lost money for the last 14 years at the rate of £1,000 a year.

Hear, hear.

I would suggest to the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) that when he loses money on his business, he does not give up business.

It depends upon how long that goes on.

He makes it pay. It is a reflection on the Agricultural Department, when it comes to doing a job instead of talking about it, that they are not successful, and if they are to teach our farmers to run the fanning industry, they should do so at a profit. I suggest that the wine farm can be run at a profit, and that before we sell Groot Constantia a competent man should be appointed, who should have a free hand to see whether both ends cannot be made to meet, and do away with the red tape. I think it can be done. If we sell Groot Constantia it will be only a few more years before we buy another wine farm at an exorbitant price. Surely, with the knowledge at its disposal, the Agricultural Department should be able to make a wine farm of 140 morgen pay.

I should like to call the Minister’s attention to the terrible state of Pietersburg, though I think the Minister is already fairly well acquainted with the position. Pietersburg is in an unhappy petition, because in the first place there was a terrible drought, and after that, the caterpillars. I want to ask the Minister whether he will have an enquiry made, how to fight caterpillars in the future. The condition is worse this year than during the locust plague, because where the caterpillars have been there is absolutely nothing left. If they are to be fought in the future, then it is necessary to take steps now to find a remedy. Pietersburg is still fighting against drought and caterpillars, but east coast fever is another matter. This disease has prevailed there for the last 18 or 20 years, and there has recently been a ease where one calf became sick, though the public do not believe it was east coast fever. It is possibly unfortunate that there were no more deaths, because then the people might have believed it was east coast fever. I should like the Minister to enquire whether it was east coast fever or not, and I should like steps to be taken in the matter, because the public assume that the disease is epidemic. Unless a proper enquiry is made, one cannot state that in this case only a single calf died. Under the regulations with regard to dipping, a few hundred will die. The Minister has extended the time from five to seven days, but the people have no grass or grazing for their animals. Where, therefore, simultaneous dipping has to take place, many cattle can only be dipped late in the afternoon, and there is no food for them that day. That, means that many will die from the dipping. If the Minister will further extend the time if possible to 10 or 14 days, then it will be something to meet the people and they will greatly appreciate it. Then there is the question of the farmers who come to the towns with their produce in ox-wagons. The conditions are such to-day that the town is practically their only market, because they are not close to the railway. It may be said that they should buy donkeys, but they have no money. If the Minister will only provide for this case, he will greatly assist these people. They will be quite satisfied to dip before they enter the towns, and if they are permitted to come in with their wagons it will give great satisfaction, even if special precautionary measures are taken before permission is given. Then I think it is necessary that things in the northern Transvaal as regards veterinary surgeons should be changed. The position to-day is impossible with the chief veterinary surgeon at Pietersburg, who also has to do duty in Zoutpansberg and in Potgietersrust. There is east coast fever again in Zontpansberg, and it is necessary for him to pay attention to that, and therefore he has to be a good deal in Zoutpansberg. The veterinary surgeon who is there to-day is well acquainted with conditions in Zoutpansberg, and he could go there permanently, but then Pietersburg must have one who can give his whole attention to that district. The present veterinary surgeon is for more than half, for three-quarters of his time, not in Petersburg. If the farmers want to send a request to him, he is not always there, and the assistant has not the power to grant or refuse the requests. We ought to have a veterinary surgeon there who can devote all his time to the district. I therefore ask that Mr. Machine should go back to Zoutpansberg, and that Mr. de Wet, a zealous official, be appointed at Pietersburg. Then there is another question, to wit whether the prosecutions that are taking place cannot be stopped. Prosecutions were a good thing in the beginning as an example to people who refused or were negligent in dipping. It was quite right then to take a few of them to court. It is, however, not necessary, when the people are in difficulties, to take a hundred to court. Although they do not believe that there is east coast fever, they nevertheless dip, and I think it will lead to more satisfaction and better co-operation if the Minister says that no further prosecutions shall take place for contraventions in the past. Then there is the question of chief inspectors being used as dipping inspectors. They are at the moment doing their utmost to be present at the dipping, which will, if a chief inspector has much work in connection with the dipping, make it impossible for him to give his attention to the sheep division of his work. The result is that where the sheep inspectors in the past have done good work in connection with scab, their work as regards scab is now entirely neglected. Therefore, I think it is necessary that more dipping inspectors should be appointed where there is east coast fever, and some of the sheep inspectors must be seconded to occupy themselves with sheep and not with cattle. The result of the present system will be that in many parts scab will break out again, and it is not properly fought. Then there is another question about which I wrote to the Minister, viz., the discharge of Mr. Promnitz, the dipping inspector. He occupied that post there for 15 years, and gave satisfaction all the time. The former veterinary surgeon said that Mr. Promnitz was his best officer. I am prepared to admit that he may have been discharged for some reason, possibly negligence. He was discharged upon 24 hours’ notice. The public feel that an injustice has been done to him because, in the first place, he does not know why he was dismissed. He was only told that this or that was his offence. He asks that a proper enquiry shall be held into his dismissal. I hope the Minister will agree to this, and not only ask the person who dismissed him what the reason was. If after the enquiry it appears that he was guilty of something serious, then the position will be different. It is, however, difficult to tell the people that a man has been dismissed after 15 years’ service, during which time he has worked hard, without being able to give him the reason. The public will be satisfied if he is given another chance, because he will still be able to do as good work as he did a few years ago. Then there is another question of great importance, viz., the administration of dipping tanks, which falls under the Department of Native Affairs. I hope the Minister will give effect to the report of the Agricultural Department, that that department is taking over the administration of the dipping tanks from the Department of Native Affairs. The people complain that the disease breaks out under the cattle of the natives. It is necessary that that administration should fall under the Department of Agriculture. I must honestly say that the class of person which is appointed by the Department of Native Affairs cannot be regarded as so efficient as those of the Agricultural Department. The officials of the Agricultural Department are a class which people can have more confidence in than in the officials appointed by the Native Affairs Department. Then there is another question which concerns the general position, viz., the difficulty of getting a market for cattle. I admit the Minister has done very much, more than the former Government, but the difficulty is that the number of cattle is still further increasing to-day, and that the people have no hope of disposing of them. According to the report of the Agricultural Department, there were 3,949,000 native cattle in the Union in 1923, and in 1924 4,236,000, an increase of about 300,000. That is the unfortunate position that in the northern Transvaal, and the Transvaal generally, not only natives farm with them, but also white people. [Time limit.]

I heartily agree with the remarks of the hon. member for Albany (Mr. Struben) in connection with the “all wool pack.” The Minister made a regulation to fix the weight of woolsacks at 11½ lbs. per sack. We are glad of that, but my attitude is that the all wool pack will be able to be made in South Africa. With reference to the fixing of the weight of woolsacks at 11½ lbs., I want to bring something to the notice of the Minister, and ask him whether it is not possible to introduce legislation to prevent 2 lbs. more being deducted than is actually the weight of the sack. If that 2 lbs. is deducted, then it means, at 1s. per lb. of wool, a loss every year of £60,000 to the wool farmers. If a regulation can be made that a woolsack must weigh 11½ lbs., then legislation can be introduced to obviate the unfair exploitation of the wool farmers by the deduction of 2 lbs. more than the actual weight of the bag. Then there is something else of a very serious nature, and I am certain that the hon. members for Cradock (Mr. G. C. van Heerden) and Somerset East (Mr. Vosloo) will support me. The eradication of prickly pear comes under the provincial administration, but I think it is a ridiculous thing to economize in this respect to an amount of £7,000 per annum. The farmers of South Africa are now finding out, just as those of Queensland did, that pentoxide of arsenic is a splendid remedy to eradicate prickly pear. It costs, however, 1s. 9d. per lb. to-day in South Africa, while in Queensland it costs less than 5d. per lb. I want to bring the value of the remedy to the Minister’s notice, and to read the following quotation to show how much success has been obtained in Queensland—

That is what can be done with arsenic pentoxide. The report goes on—

If arsenic pentoxide can do that and has been an amazing remedy in Queensland then the same applies to South Africa. I know that the Minister has already tried to find out whether the costs of this preparation which are now £41 10s. per ton can be lessened. I want, however, to say if the Government does not go into the matter and if the remedy is not used then Graaff-Reinet, Cradock, Somerset East, Uitenhage, right up to Fort Beaufort will become absolutely valueless in the next two-years. As the farmers are prepared to do their share in connection with the importation of arsenic pentoxide, I think it is only fair that the Government should import the remedy as much as possible. Then there is something else with reference to the deletion of the Vote for sending experts to select rams for the wool, farmers. The former Government, and the then Minister of Agriculture gave the experts’ services gratis to the people. Since 1925 we have been informed that the Agricultural Department and the Minister have stopped that expenditure, and I am informed that it was done on the urgent representation of experts who are not in Government employ. I can freely say that almost all have an interest in one or other stud farm in the country. There are cases which have come to my notice where the expert has gone to the ram breeder and arranged with him to get a certain amount if he recommended a farmer to buy a ram at a certain price.

Who does that ?

Would the hon. member very much like to know that ? I am sorry for him. Those who are not in the Government service are out to exploit the wool farmers and make money out of them. The Government experts are worth a great deal, but it is a pity that the Minister took a decision like that. The opportunity has as a result been taken away from the people owning good sheep. I hope the Minister will seriously consider providing in the future for experts being made available.

They are available.

The Minister says they are available, but the poor people have to pay for their services.

No.

I shall yet prove to the Minister that the experts are not available except upon payment, when he will withdraw his words. Then there is an important matter affecting the farmers, viz.: the numbing push louse. I know that great pressure was brought to bear on the former Minister of Agriculture in connection with the matter. An expert was appointed to make enquiry but his report was never published or laid on the Table. At the moment I know of a case where half of a farmer’s sheep suffered from the small red bushlouse—the paralytic tick—which numbs the sheep. The hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) will remember the case. Now I want to know if a proper enquiry cannot be instituted to fight the paralytic tick without dipping the sheep and reducing the value of the wool in that way. It is very necessary and as regards Graaff-Reinet, it is absolutely necessary for a veterinary surgeon to be stationed there to make enquiries.

In 1923 select committees were appointed to consider the spread of scab and the suppression of stock theft. Has the Minister given effect to the recommendations of those committees, all of which were unanimous? One of the recommendations was the erection of a fence between the Free State, the Barkly East district and Basutoland. At that time Basutoland was affected with scab to the extent of 75 per cent. I am very anxious that we should have better scab administration, at the same time we should take precautions against infection from outside. A farmer in Barkly East especially who has to dip his sheep in August is to be sympathized with, for he suffers severe losses. It is injurious alike to sheep and wool. The only way to avoid the necessity of winter dipping is to see that flocks are clean before the advent of the cold weather. If farmers are to be exposed to scab from Basutoland as they undoubtedly are the position is very difficult. The select committee recommended that the Basutoland authorities he asked to contribute half the cost of the fence along their border, but nothing has been clone in the matter. More attention should be paid by the Minister to reports of select committees and commissions. Such reports are costly and are generally very valuable, and it is a great pity that they should be shelved in the way they are done. I do hope that the Minister will be able to give some encouraging reply in regard to the question of fencing on the Basutoland border. Quite apart from the reports I have quoted: If the farmer is prepared to do his half, as many of us up there are, I think the Basutoland Government could be got to pay the other portion and it would cost our Government nothing.

I moved a reduction of the Minister’s salary the other day to draw his attention to what I considered was a matter of very urgent importance. I must say that the reply which the Minister gave was a very disappointing one indeed. Here was a case where the country had an opportunity of getting rid of something like 4,000 tons of maize which were blocking up the elevators and the difficulties which were preventing the removal of this maize were placed by me before the Minister as clearly as I could and the only reply I could get practically was that it was not his business and that it was a matter that would probably he dealt with either by the Minister of Railways or the Minister of Finance. I think it is the business of the Minister of Agriculture. The elevators are loaded with 60,000 tons of mealies, mostly the property of growers, and they have to he sold, and when an opportunity for exporting at a profitable price arises, all sorts of difficulties are placed in our way.

Older! The hon. member is not entitled to discuss that question at all.

I am dealing with page 144 of the Estimates—agricultural economics and markets. Am I not in order?

No, the hon. member is only entitled to discuss the Minister’s administration in respect of the different items comprised in the votes of his department. Questions of tariffs and preference do not come under this vote. The hon. member is referring to the speech he made the other night.

I am referring to the fact that there is an order for a large quantity of mealies and the Minister says that the removal or sale of these mealies is not his concern. I want to deal with that phase of the matter under the Vote for Economics and Markets, page 144.

The reason why these mealies cannot be sold is due to something done by another Minister. The hon. member cannot discuss that matter on this vote.

May I discuss the vote?

The hon. member may discuss the vote and I will pull him up if he is wrong.

I was under the impression that this division of economics and markets was to deal with the sale of produce raised in this country and to help to find a market for it. Here we have a vote for salaries of officers, etc., running into a total of £21,709. I would have thought that that department would have assisted the Minister and have pointed out to him where there was a market to be obtained for the produce of this country which was held up owing to certain disabilities that exist. The position to-day is that there is this demand for our stuff and that there are certain difficulties in the way of its removal. If the department of economics and markets are not prepared to interest themselves in the matter of obtaining a market for our mealies, I suggested that the department had better be done away with and a great and useless expense saved to the country.

Order! The hon. member cannot pursue that aspect.

I am not going to pursue it. I have said all I can, but I would like to deal now with a letter which has come from New Zealand in connection with another matter in which it is pointed out that there is a regulation in that country which provides for the fumigating of all mealies which go into New Zealand from any country where rinderpest is known to exist. Now, there is no rinderpest existing in South Africa at all, and apparently the New Zealand Government had never been officially informed that it is a non-existing disease here. If they are so informed by the Minister that rinderpest is a thing of the past and that there is no fear whatever of any contamination or infection through the importing of maize from South Africa into New Zealand, it will do away with the possibility at the other end of this maize having to be fumigated. As a matter of fact, a shipment of maize sent to New Zealand recently was held up for fumigating purposes, but local pressure was brought to bear in New Zealand and the maize was released. I trust that the Minister will give this matter his serious attention.

Under division A of this vote I find a sum of £300 as contribution to the International Agricultural Institute, Rome, and further an amount of £300 as arrear contribution. I should like to know from the Minister what benefit South Africa gets from those grants. I am not opposed to our co-operating with the outside world, especially where one of our chief industries is concerned, but although the vote is small I should like information because there is something in the principle. As regards the second point, I should also like to know what it means. I want to take this opportunity of saying a few words with reference to what the hon. member for Albany (Mr. Struben) said in connection with tuberculosis in stock. We should like to know what the condition is in the south-western districts, especially in the surroundings of Cape Town. The medical men are now practically agreed that tuberculosis can be conveyed by stock to people and we must do everything to prevent that. We are glad that tuberculosis is decreasing in our country, but I should like to know what steps are being taken to prevent the spreading of tuberculosis. If the department is not prepared to again impose the restrictions which formerly existed then I should like to know what steps are being taken to stop the spreading by diseased cows or milk. As regards locust destruction, we are all thankful for the excellent work done by the Minister and his officials. We are glad that the vote is reduced by £190,000 for the next year, but in spite of the good intentions and the great work which the Minister personally did, there were defects in his organization and if there is to be any reorganization I should just like to ask the Minister to see that those defects disappear. I do not want to go into details. Difficulties have from time to time been brought to the notice of the Minister, and I know that in my con stituency, e.g., meetings are still being held. I will not say meetings of protest, but meetings expressing a certain dissatisfaction about the number of officials and their discretion. As the Minister has rendered such a great service to the country we want to ask him to render a further service by seeing that in his reorganization those defects disappear. With regard to Vote J. (1)—Markets and Economy. I see that instead of one market official three are now being appointed, and the vote is increased by £1,000. We, of course, welcome the attempt to extend the market, but I just want to ask the Minister whether this increased staff will also be occupied in connection with the extension of our markets on the continent of Europe, or only of our inland markets?

I would like to ask the Minister whether the division of economics and markets enquires into or investigates the economic side of agricultural production.

Yes.

Then I would ask the Minister whether the division of economics and markets has gone into the matter of some of these import duty changes and how agricultural production will he affected. Amongst the changes that we had in the tariff last year was the suspended duty on netting wire.

The hon. member is now discussing tariffs and, as has been held previously, this falls under the treasury vote.

I am not questioning the matter at all. I want to ask the Minister now whether the department of economics and markets has really gone into this and other alterations in the tariff with a view of seeing how it will affect agricultural production, because I think that when there is any proposal to alter the tariffs which may affect, directly or indirectly, agricultural production, his department of economics should investigate and advise him.

The hon. member may ask that question, but I do not think he should discuss it.

My question to the Minister is whether the Department of Economics has considered these matters and reported to the Minister. Then I should like to ask the Minister Whether his department has gone thoroughly into the question of sulphur contents in dried fruits. We are advised that from the beginning of 1927 our dried fruit would only be allowed into the English market provided there is not more than a certain amount of sulphur. The Minister’s department should advise the producers, because, as is well known, sulphur is used for bleaching purposes in the drying of apricots, peaches and sultanas. A little time back the division of markets and economics published a paragraph in regard to the Argentine competition and caused a scare. What is the department doing? Is his department going thoroughly into the matter to find out what competition we really have to fear from that side, and whether they have certain varieties of fruit with which they may compete with us, and whether we have the best varieties to meet that competition. Then there was another publication of the division of markets and economics, which I hope will not be repeated. It said that sellers’ prices for sultanas and apricots on the other side were too high. I do not think anything like that ought to appear from the division, because it affects the seller here and the buyer on the other side. What happened? Those sellers who knew more than the division of markets and economics maintained their prices, although sales were adversely affected. Others immediately reduced their prices and sold out, and did not realize the best prices, and after a temporary slump we are now getting the price which the division advised was too high. Then we had another publication. I did not know its origin when I raised the matter in this House on a former occasion. That advised the amount of raisins and sultanas shipped here. We have since found out how that was published. It was supplied by the fruit inspector at the docks to the department of economics and markets who cabled it across. They cabled that there was so much on the water. They did not know whether it was going to England or to the Continent. Such publications cannot do any good. It immediately effected the sales. As a matter of fact all the dried fruit shipped was not intended for the English market at all. A good bit was for the Continent, but it affected our sales in London adversely. [Time limit.]

There are two matters to which I wish to draw the Minister’s attention. The first is in regard to the sale of penguin eggs. The contractors who now hold the contract, and who claim to be the sole contractors, are, from information I have received, dumping thousands of eggs every year in the sea, so as to maintain the high prices. I think if the Minister would make enquiry he would find that these eggs are being dumped to a very large extent, and that the eggs are being dumped to keep up the prices. This seems to me to be a matter of great importance. Then I wish to draw the Minister’s attention to the egg-laying competition at Glen. The Minister must know that the Western Province Agricultural Society has spent large sums of money in building pens and running such competitions. In the early days, we lost large sums every year, and have brought the competition to the position that now there is a profit. These competitions have been of very great value to poultry keepers, for we always keep a careful check of everything. We have issued careful statements every year, which enable all poultry keepers to know exactly what it costs to run such a competition, and what it costs to keep a certain number of hens. At considerable cost, Port Elizabeth followed our example. We have always charged 10s. 6d. as entrance fee. Potchefstroom and Cedara, who followed on later, and started these competitions, and also charged 10s. 6d., but though they are Government institutions, they never issued statements which are of any value to the public. They tell us, at the end of the year, that they have made so much profit, and nothing else. They do not say what it costs to feed the birds or supervise the competition. Now Glen is entering into competition and has reduced the entrance fee to 8s., and claim that they are going to run a competition for a thousand hens. The result is that, with the smaller entry fee, the Government Department is going to cut out Port Elizabeth and the. Western Province completely, and we stand the risk of losing a large sum of money sunk in buildings, etc. The Minister should tell us exactly what is happening in regard to this matter, because, whereas we gave the public full details, the Government departments have given practically no details at all, so that no one knows what it costs to produce these eggs. The Minister should also consider whether it is fair that a Government department should run a competition like this in competition with a private society. After all, the societies have done a vast amount of good, and we claim that we have brought the present state of perfection about by these competitions. If the Government is now going to undercut, then we shall have to close down our competitions, and will also be faced with a very heavy loss, and we shall feel that all our efforts in the past have gone for nought. I hope the Minister will go into the matter as to whether Glen should not come into line with the other departments, and the private societies, and not try to undercut us. We are doing what we are for the benefit of the industry, and if there is going to be competition, it is going to do harm to every one of us.

I want to bring to the notice of the Minister the number of cattle in the Union. According to the report of the Department of Agriculture, it appears that in 1923 there were 9,315,000 cattle, and in 1924, 9,606,000, which represents an increase of about 300,000. When one analyses the figures one finds that those 300,000 are practically all native cattle. There has not been an increase in the numbers of better class cattle. The Government should take steps in this matter, either to find a market for this class of cattle, or to assist the farmers to manufacture the meat by some method or other. Importation from Rhodesia has been reduced by 60 per cent., but the position is as critical as before. Last week there was a report in a Johannesburg paper in which the following is communicated—

If it is the case that cattle cannot be disposed of at any price, the position is critical. The native cattle are owned by the poorer class of burghers. It is no good saying that they should buy better, because they cannot do so. This is a case where the Minister’s department should suggest a way of disposal. As regards importation from Rhodesia, we find the figure for 1925 was 19,250 cattle, against 41,716 the year before. Thus, the position is still such that cattle in the Union cannot be sold, and steps ought to be taken when the agreement with Rhodesia is renewed, so that even 19,000 cattle are not admitted. It is nice to talk about living on friendly terms with Rhodesia, but everyone will see that it is impossible to allow cattle into this country if the cattle here cannot be sold. The number has already been reduced by 60 per cent., but the 19,000 cattle can be still further reduced or wiped out entirely. Then there is the question of the dairy industry. Farmers complain more and more that when they send in their cream they are not treated honestly and fairly by the various creameries. It is necessary for the farmers to have more confidence in the creameries. I understand the Minister has already given instructions to the Board of Trade and Industries to hold an enquiry, and I should like to know from the Minister what the board has recommended, and what has been done. Then there is the question of the inoculation of horses. It is a serious question in the northern and other parts of the Transvaal. Hundreds of horses die of horse sickness. I understand that a remedy has now been discovered, which is a real success. I am glad of it, but the farmers feel that they are not kept informed, and do not always know when the horses are inoculated. I think greater publicity should be given to it and not only that, but provision should be made for more horses being inoculated. I do not understand why, as the remedy is a success, all the horses cannot be inoculated. I should also like to know why the charge is so high as £3 per horse? In the past it was £3 per horse, including insurance, which is not the case to-day. It seems to me to be a big amount, especially as 50 or 60 horses are usually inoculated at a time. Then there is the question of East Coast fever. In connection with the eradication of scab, work is being done today on entirely new lines, but in the case of East Coast fever the same remedies are being employed as have been used for the last twenty years, I want to ask the Minister if it is not necessary to appoint a number of experts to employ themselves exclusively on research work in connection with East Coast fever, to try to find out if it will not be possible to get rid of that disease. In Pietersburg the farmers have, for the last eighteen years, been dipping, and the cattle to-day still get the fever. I am certain that if the Minister gives his attention to the matter—and I know he will—new methods will be followed which will meet with greater success.

I wish to draw the Minister’s attention to the state of the cattle trade. We all know that this country contains about nine million cattle, and the annual consumption for local requirements is under 400,000. The cattle population is being added to at the rate of 2,000 head per day, or three-quarters of a million per annum for the last few years. Last year some 50,000 head were exported, but 36,000 came from Rhodesia, and only 4,000 from the Union. Unless we can remedy that, I do not see where we are going to land. One hon. member said, spend £1,000,000 on stud bulls, but that will not remedy the position one iota. Farmers have not been taught to feed their cattle. If it pays farmers on the other side to purchase oil cake, hominy chop, etc., manufactured in the Union, I think it would pay us to use the same facilities, and not to impoverish our own soil. The continent is the only market open to us at present, owing to the low prices, and under the exchange the prices have to be very low, and there is no great inducement to farmers to improve their breed and get a fair return. I would suggest that the bounty be again given by the Government—½d. per lb. on the Continental grades, ¾d. for fair average quality, and 1d. for good average quality. That would be an inducement to grade up cattle, so that you could enter the English market. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to an article which appeared in the last “Farmers' Weekly,” which shows that the Argentine is trying a new scheme of export— shipping cattle to Belgium, where they are slaughtered, and, 24 hours after slaughtering, put on the English market, the meat being described as equal to the best English killed. We are a long way from doing that, and we must induce farmers to produce a better article. The local public is very undiscriminating in its purchase of meat, and take the meat of a trek ox, and do not know what a joint of meat is. Trek oxen are no use for the English export market, for which you want young lean beef ; and to get young beef cattle must be fed in the requisite way. It is a waste of time, energy and money to fatten cattle, and then to let the fat “run off” again.

A few months ago an order was issued by the Agricultural Department stopping the experts in the Agricultural Colleges from writing or contributing articles to the press for payment, the pretence being that it was prejudicial to their interests. These experts, are, however, free to write articles, provided there is no payment attached. The Minister and his department do not seem to appreciate the fact that it takes as much time to write a free article as one for which payment is made. This prohibition or embargo is one of the most ill-considered, silly instructions that have been given by the Agricultural Department. It is most foolish, because these agricultural experts have no better medium of imparting knowledge to the public than through the press. The Agricultural Department will allow an expert three or four days in order to address a meeting of farmers, which is not “a waste of time.” but if, in his own time, he writes an article which probably thousands read and have available for reference, he is prohibited from doing so, which is a very retrogressive step, and liable to do a lot of damage to the farming community

For what paper are you acting?

For all papers catering for the needs of the agricultural public. There is the “Natal Farmer” for one; it is issued entirely for the benefit of the farmer. There is also the “Farmers’ Weekly.” Am I correct in stating that an order has been issued prohibiting Government experts writing articles for payment ?

Yes.

I am very sorry to hear it, for It is a mistake. The lecturers wrote these articles in their spare time, and I cannot see why the department should try to stifle them. What is the reason for the order—is it to increase the circulation of the “Agricultural Journal” ? The number of subscribers to that paper is not so numerous as it should be, as some of the farmers prefer the “Farmers’ Weekly,” the “Natal Farmer” and the “Farmers’ Advocate.”

I appreciate the tone which marked the discussion this afternoon. I heard of a terrific attack that I had to expect, but I am glad at the way things have turned out this afternoon. The hon, member for Boshof (Mr. van Rensburg) spoke about the destruction of locusts. Let me at once say that we are not yet free from them. Though 14 days ago the country was clear, except in certain places where locusts were still hatching out, flying swarms from the Kalahari have now again appeared. I hope they are not large, and that we can master them, and that the expense will be much less than in former years. Hon. members will appreciate our difficulties. We have to do with a large desert, where the locusts can breed, and notwithstanding all our trouble, we shall always have a certain amount of bother with them. I can, however, say that the position to-day is satisfactory, and I hope that it will not be necessary to come to the House for more money to cover the expenditure in connection with the destruction of locusts. The hon. member has also said a few words about certain expenditure which, in his opinion, was too high, inter alia, the £400 earned by the district officials. The farmers mostly do the spraying, but the official has to go round in the district to see whether the work has been properly done, and he, of course, has to travel a lot. Then it was asked whether the official is paid only for the time that he works. Yes. To-day the locust officers have been discharged, except a few of them who are still working on the borders to see whether locusts come in from adjoining territories. The staff at the head office has also been reduced, but a number of officials are still engaged there on administrative duties, such as the settlement of accounts, etc. The hon. member for Hope Town (Dr. Stals) and other hon. members can therefore rest assured that the expenditure will be kept as low as possible. As to the remark that some officials have drawn as much as £1,000 and £1,100 a year in expenses, I can assure hon. members that it is no more than their due. We cannot expect them to pay their travelling expenses out of their own pockets. I have travelled about with the inspectors myself, and know that they have to travel thousands of miles. The hon. member for Lydenburg (Mr. Nieuwenhuize) spoke about the reduction in the amount for the inoculation of horses from £2,000 to £500. Let me tell the hon. member that the reduction is in consequence of the great success we have had with the inoculation of horses. This year we have inoculated 1,743 horses, of which the death rate was only 72.6 per cent. ; thus not even 3 per cent, have died as the result of inoculation. For this reason, I think I am justified in reducing the amount from £2,000 to £500. 3,642 mules were inoculated, of which the death ratio was 22. There has, therefore, been a great improvement in conditions since the new method was employed. The hon. member for Pietersburg said we should not now pay such a high amount. I will go into that. He also said that we should now inoculate a larger number of horses. We are engaged in the laboratory preparing to inoculate on a much larger scale next year. The hon. member for Ladismith (Mr. J. J. M. van Zyl) spoke about water plague among sheep. A great deal of investigation has taken place to find a remedy against that disease, but so far without success. The investigation is being continued. The hon. member for Barberton (Mr. Rood) said something about citrus cancer, and asked where it came from. We have put the amount of £600 on the Estimates again because new cases of this cancer are constantly occurring, and I think it would be wrong to reduce the attempts to fight this disease and to discharge the inspectors. It is difficult to find out where the disease comes from. It may be latent for years, and then suddenly break out. The principal district where it prevails is Rustenburg. That is the reason why the citrus experimental farm is not there, but in the district of Barberton, because I could not put it in Rustenburg if cancer prevailed there, and so lead to its spread. I see that the people of Rustenburg are a little dissatisfied about it, but I cannot help it. Then the hon. member spoke about a disease among the tomatoes, and the carelessness of the people in dealing with it. Well, that is surely a matter for the farmers themselves, to fight the disease and to see that it does not spread. As regards east coast fever, I must say it is a difficult disease to fight. Where it comes from, I do not know. It may possibly be smuggled in, and it is very difficult to follow the movements of the disease. Then the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg (North) (Mr. Strachan) spoke about the salary which the officials engaged on fighting east coast fever get. Well, if the Government comes and says that an extra tax must be imposed to increase salaries, what will hon. members say ? If we commence to increase, where will it end? I want to add that I get 20 to 30 letters every day, and in all thousands of letters from applicants for this work. If the wage of £20 per month was so bad, there would surely not be so many applicants. I do not see my way to increase the salary. We have a fairly large amount on the Estimates for the fighting of it, and I hope the position will improve. Then the hon. member for Pietersburg (Mr. J. F. Tom Naudé) mentioned the matter of east coast fever in the Pietersburg district. It is very difficult to satisfy everybody, and difficult to satisfy all the people there. They do not believe any longer that if blood smears are taken that the veterinary surgeons can say whether it is east coast fever or not. There is always difficulty when east coast fever breaks out in a district. One must take practical remedies, and if that is not done, the sickness spreads through the whole country. Although it possibly seems hard, it is, in the circumstances, necessary to take very much more severe steps. If that is not done, and the disease spreads over the whole district, who will get the blame? It will be immediately said that if the Minister had taken better precautions, it would not have happened. Therefore, it is necessary to take drastic steps to protect the rest of the country. Since the 15th instant, the time between the various dippings has been extended from five to seven days, and the hon. member now wishes it to be made 10 days. I will consider it if no further cases occur. Then I will meet the people and give a longer period of 10 days. The hon. member mentioned that it was advisable to institute an enquiry into and devote more attention to east coast fever. I may say that we have always been busy enquiring into this, and, as the hon. member knows, we have had no further success. It is said that in East Africa there is a disease which coincides very much with east coast fever, and it is thought that it is possible that it is that other disease. The distinction, however, has not yet been clearly made, and therefore we must be careful. We must for the moment continue to treat it as east coast fever, but we are going into the matter further. The hon. member also mentioned the difficulty of the farmers in connection with the carriage of their produce. I asked the veterinary surgeon if he could safely recommend the people being permitted to go with their wagons to the villages, because I do not want to cause them unnecessary trouble. Then the matter of the veterinary surgeons was also mentioned. I am now considering the appointment of separate veterinary surgeons for Pietersburg and Zoutpansberg. I have given the head office instructions to make the necessary arrangements. Then the matter of the discharge of Mr. Promnitz, the cattle inspector at Pietersburg, was mentioned. According to the report within my knowledge, this official was very negligent. He has been an inspector for 15 years, and the hon. member said this afternoon that he was very good ; but, according to my information, the cattle there were full of ticks, and he did not properly regulate the dipping. When he got orders to do certain things, he neglected to carry them out. The hon. member has also mentioned the dairy industry. If I understood him correctly, he thinks that the cream is not properly tested. The officials are there to properly go into this. I have also received complaints from other places, and immediately brought them to the notice of my department, and gave instructions that enquiry was to be made to find out if there was anything wrong. The hon. member for Pietersburg and other hon. members mentioned the importation of cattle from Rhodesia, I recently pointed out how the importation from Rhodesia had lessened, and it seems to me that we have done what was possible to improve the position. The question is put how one ought to go to work to improve market conditions. There is only one way, and that is for the farmers to properly organize and co-operate. That is the method recommended by the Board of Trade and Industries. Then there is the scheme for exporting cattle. Let me say at once that the European market for cattle is not so good as our own. That is the difficult position that exists to-day. Scrub cattle cannot be exported to England. The people there want good meat. People in Italy also want good meat, but the market there can still be further developed, and I hope use will be made of it. The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden; mentioned a few things, and one is the question of rams. The hon. member said that farmers now have to pay for expert help in the purchase of rams. The Auditor-General says, on page 32 of this report—

The hon. member will therefore see that the difficulty has been removed. There was a time when the practice was stopped, but since I came into office we reinstated the position, and farmers can make use of the experts, which I regard as a very useful thing. Then the hon. member spoke about making sacks in our country. We shall welcome a factory for making them here, but as long as we cannot make sufficient sacks, we cannot prohibit the importation of them. Then the hon. member spoke about the eradication of prickly pear, and said that formerly an amount of £7,000 was annually spent for the purpose. This is a matter coming under the Provincial Council, and they paid it. I have now written to the Administration of the Cape Province, and asked if it cannot take any steps in the matter, and I hope this work will be again taken up keenly by them. As for the price of arsenic pent-oxide used for the eradication of prickly pear, I have just received a letter from Johannesburg which states that this poison can be obtained at 6d. per lb. The opportunity therefore exists to get it at a reasonable price. The hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel) complains that departmental experts were writing articles for journals on payment. Yes, we prohibit that, because the heads of my department consider it unfair to allow certain officers to make money over and above their salary by writing articles. It is unfair towards the other officers who probably have not an opportunity of doing so, and my officers unanimously think that it should not be allowed. I agree with them, because if an officer writes for a newspaper, the tendency exists to subsequently neglect his proper work. If they want to write articles, let them do so for the “Agricultural Journal,” and if the hon. member is such a good farmer, he ought to see to it that all the farmers in his district subscribe to that journal. There they can get all information.

If an official wants to write without payment ?

Then we do not prohibit it. The hon. member for Cape Town (Harbour) (Maj. G. B. van Zyl) mentioned the sale of penguin eggs, and said that many eggs are thrown into the sea to keep up the price. I think he is wrong, because the head of the department informed me that the demand is greater than the supply, and they will surely not throw away the eggs if that is the case. Then the hon. member asked for information as to why the department was continuing egg-laying competitions. If the Government did nothing of this kind, they would say the Government is doing nothing. Does the hon. member wish us to do nothing in that direction ? The hon. member for Worcester (Mr. Heatlie) mentioned the subject of “sultanas” and also dried fruit. In connection with the statement of the hon. member, I will have an enquiry made. As regards dried fruit and grapes, we are making investigations, but we have not yet got satisfactory results. I hope we shall soon do so. The hon. member for Aliwal (Mr. Sephton) has again referred to a report of a select committee with reference to the fencing of certain borders, and Basutoland, and he represented how bad the position was with reference to scab in Basutoland. I can tell him that the position is not as bad as he depicts it. The Governor-General took some steps there some years ago to eradicate it. I shall make further enquiries, and if it is so bad I will ask the Governor-General to carry out a simultaneous dipping there. His Excellency has always hitherto been prepared to assist us, and will now again, I think, be prepared to give instructions to fight scab. With reference to the fencing of boundaries, I may say that the Government made representations to Basutoland, but the administration there is not inclined to bear half the cost. As regards the carrying out of the report mentioned by the hon. member, it is impossible for this Government to do so. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) and for Newlands (Mr. Stuttaford) brought up the subject of Groot Constantia. The hon. member for Newlands said that it is wrong for a wine farm situated near Cape Town in the heart of the wine farming district to be run at a loss. The farm, however, is not only used for wine farming and other farming, but a number of students are also housed there. That is done on Groot Constantia, and there is also the experimental farm at Malmesbury, the agricultural school at Elsenburg, and the faculty of agriculture at the University of Stellenbosch. In this small circle, therefore, there are four different places where students can be trained. Is it fair, then to continue Groot Constantia for that purpose, and for the taxpayers to have to contribute? I have, therefore, decided to dose down Groot Constantia—on which the buildings destroyed by fire will again be erected. I am now busy arranging with the Minister of Public Works to keep out the middle part of the farm, and then the Government will decide what to do with the remaining part of it, whether to sell it or to lease it for 10 or 20 years. It is not desirable to retain it as there are other places where students can obtain the training. The students have already left the place, and the staff will also leave one of these days. Then the hon. member for Klip River (Mr. Anderson) mentioned the matter of the student who went to study overseas, and who was treated so badly by the department on his return, that he went back to America. Hon. members will see that the departmental committee has reported that it is necessary for the officials of the Agricultural department to be bilingual.

Why was not the chance given to him ?

I am not responsible for the mistake of the previous Government in sending a unilingual person to go and study there. I will certainly not give a man a bursary if he is unilingual. If hon. members knew what difficulties I have with officials who are still unilingual, they would make no trouble. I shall not appoint any unilingual official, except it he to a special department for which I cannot get another man.

Why did you not give him an opportunity to learn the second language ?

He had it, and was provisionally appointed for six months, but before that time expired he resigned. Does not the Constitution provide that the people must be bilingual ? I think the time has come for every official in the country to be bilingual, and the sooner hon. members opposite understand that, the better.

It has cost the country £760.

Then the hon. member for Cape Town (Hanover Street) (Mr. Alexander) mentioned the matter of educating the children of the people on the Guano Islands. The contributions for that purpose will be two-thirds of the boarding expanses. The hon. member for Umbilo (Mr. Deane) has again raised the old story of last Friday and last Monday. He now wants to abolish scrub cattle. It is in the interests of the farmers there to improve the breed of their cattle, just as it is in that of the sheep farmers to Improve the breed of their sheep. There are people here who have improved their studs. At the experimental farms, good bulls are kept, and the hon. member must not expect the Government to introduce legislation to prevent people from using a certain class of bull. That is also the case with a view to the native tribes in the neighbourhood. There are Government officials who advise the people in connection with the Improvement of the breed of their cattle. It can only be done by propaganda, and if hon. members assist, then we shall much sooner reach a satisfactory position than by means of legislation. Legislation will cause the greatest dissatisfaction and trouble, and consequently I am not prepared to introduce it.

I must say that I am surprised at the, Minister’s answer that he would not appoint Mr. Clark because he is not bilingual. The Minister was prepared to over-rule the strong opinion in his department and to allow the country to suffer a loss of £760. Mr. Clark is going to America and that country is to benefit by the expense we have incurred. The hon. member for Klipriver (Mr. Anderson) read a letter wherein mention is made of the opinion which Mr. Joubert, the head of Grootfontein, has of Mr. Clark. He said that Mr. Clark is an outstanding man, but unfortunately is not fully bilingual although he understands Afrikaans. Perhaps he is just as bilingual as the Minister. I think the Minister is acting Very unreasonably. In the report of his own department I read that they say that in their opinion those who go to America with bursaries femain there too readily, and that a fine should be imposed on such persons if they do heft come back again. If the persons do riot carry out their contract the department recommends that the expenditure incurred by the Government should be made good by them, and oh this point the Secretary of Agriculture insists strongly. And, now, because the Minister decides that the individual is not fully bi-lingual

Not at all.

Mr. Jordaan says that he understands Afrikaans quite well. But it amazes me that the Minister allows this man with his technical knowledge to go away to America, a person who passed his examinations in America, with distinction, simply because lie is not fully bilingual. There are certainly many technical persons in the world, highy technical persons from whom the Minister will take advice although they are not bilingual. But the Minister goes too far when he says that a person cannot be appointed because he is not bilingual. I do not see why this country and agriculture should suffer this loss. A little while back it was not possible to obtain from the Government a lecturer for a farmers’ week in my district, and here the Government is sending a qualified man out of the country. I am certain that the farmers have in their business more regard for brains than for bilingualism. And we lose £760!

Who sent him ?

The Government.

What Government ?

What difference does that make? Mr. Joubert recommended him strongly as being the proper person to go overseas in the interests of the country. I have still a couple of other matters which I want to bring to the notice of the Minister. I want to know from the Minister whether it is correct that there is a Government Karroo-bush reserve in Fouriesburg, and I would like to have some information from the Minister in connection therewith. I think it is a very good thing, because it will be fine if in other parts of the country we could plant certain bushes such as for instance the ngana-bush, which keeps a large amount of water in the Karroo and can be a source of great profit in other parts of the country. I would like to have information about the success of this work. The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) spoke about the destruction of prickly-pear. The Minister will remember that some time ago I asked him a question about pentoxide of arsenic, and he said that tests were being made at Grootfontein. I think it would be a great advantage to the country, and I would like to know from the Minister what the result of the tests was, and I would also like to know whether enquiry was made as to whether when the prickly-pear died it was injurious for the cattle to eat the leaves. The Minister said that that fell under the provincial council, but there is a feeling that the destruction of prickly-pear is such an important matter that it should be attended to by the Department of Agriculture. It would be very useful if pentoxide of arsenic provided a cheap method for destroying prickly-pear. The Government should deliver it here as cheaply as possible, although not for nothing. If we an obtain information as to how it is used, and what the result is thereof, then it would be of great advantage. Now I must say that I am very sorry to hear from the Minister that flying locusts are coming in again and I hope that the Minister will make all possible efforts to go to work in a cheaper method in fighting them than was the case in the past. I feel very strongly about this, for I think that we cannot spend half a million of money every year in that connection. The Government undoubtedly has had very much success in fighting the locusts, but nature also did a lot. Nature, indeed played the greater part. [Time limit.]

To continue about chicory. We went to the Minister and asked him to interest himself on behalf of the farmers in the chicory industry, and the Board of Trade was also seen by the people interested in chicory-growing and asked to give more protection, which could have been provided without harm to anyone, and thus have given employment and prosperity to a large number of people. I had a telegram from the Cooperative Chicory Growers’ Association stating that the position is desperate and that the importers are defying them—in Other words are trying to squeeze the growers down to a figure at which it does not pay to produce chicory. The growers have spent a lot of time and money in finding out the best way to raise chicory and building kilns, etc. The South African product is as good as the imported. The Minister, as a friend of the farmers, should use his influence to see that this ignoring of a South African industry is not repeated. The Minister has not replied to my question regarding tuberculosis among cattle.

A good case has been made out for an investigation of the question of the manufacture of wool packs. Bradford is offering a half-penny a pound more for wool exported in all-wool packs. These packs would cost locally from 16s. to 17s. each and there is no difficulty whatever in their manufacture here. They can be made out of inferior quality wool. The used packs can be sold in England at 5s. each. The difference between the cost of an all-wool pack and a jute pack is about 10s., so allowing 5s. for the sale of the pack in England and 13s. 9d. extra for the wool in the bale because of the extra price of the half-penny a pound, the net result is that wool exported in an all-wool pack would mean that the exporter would receive 8s. 9d. more than if he used a jute pack. The only objection to the use of an all-wool pack is that it does not keep its shape when pressed or when travelling in the steamers’ holds. The Minister should ask the department of economics to go into the matter. If other countries adopt these all-wool packs and we do not, South African wool will be prejudiced.

Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 8.7 p.m.

I merely want to answer a question put by the lion, member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) in connection with the report of the Export of Eggs Commission. We shall carry out as far as is possible the report and the recommendations of the commission, but there are some recommendations we cannot give effect to, e.g., an action against the cold storage. This the Government cannot do. According to the law advisers the Government cannot do this. With reference to the certificate of the cold storage we have withdrawn this for a while until the department is satisfied that the cooling chambers are put in order again, so that we shall not have any more trouble. In the meanwhile, on the recommendation of the commission, we put the old cooling chambers into working order again so that, for the coming season, we could serve the exporters properly. Then different regulations were put into force on the recommendations of the commission in different connections. The hon. member for Cradock spoke again about the language question. I hope that the electors of Cradock will notice that the hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. C. van Heerden) pleaded that if a lecturer were to deliver a lecture to the farmers in Cradock (for it comes to no more than this) he could be unilingual. That is just the complaint which I receive continually, viz., that we send unilingual persons to give lectures. But I noticed that the people in Cradock—at least according to the hon. member—want unilingual lecturers. So I shall send the unilinguals there. The hon. member does not understand the position with regard to the resignation of Mr. Clark. I did not discharge him. He resigned of his own accord. He was appointed on trial for six months with the condition that if he gave satisfaction and learnt Afrikaans, he would be appointed for a further six months on trial. After four months, however, he resigned of his own accord. The hon. member can look at the documents in my department if he wishes. How can the hon. member say that I treated Mr. Clark badly? Then the hon. member said that we did not send an official when they required one for their farmers’ week. I have already said that farmers’ gatherings are held daily and farmers’ weeks are organized regularly, and that it is not possible to comply with every request. If, however, the programme arranged is sent in timeously, I will see that a lecturer is present. The hon. member for Albany (Mr. Struben) spoke about tuberculosis, and asked what the position is. In different parts of the country tuberculosis, is present and also in the Cape. When people report that tuberculosis exists, we have the cattle examined and, if they have tuberculosis, we destroy them. The State can, however, only-pay as compensation one-fourth of the value of the animal. The State cannot pay more. Where is the money to come from ? Consequently the public is not anxious to have the cattle destroyed. We, however, enquire into the matter and if the cattle are badly affected they are destroyed. Enquiry has, however, brought it to light—and the experts agree about this— that as long as the milk glands of the animals are not affected no harm can result ; and we take this into account, and that is the reason why we do not destroy in all cases.

In giving a few figures about this question of all-wool packs of wool, I want to be careful to understate rather than over-estimate the effect on the industry. As far as we can foresee, it is quite safe to say that it will make a difference of at least a quarter of a million sterling in favour of the wool-grower, while in the industrial world it would be the means of establishing a new industry worth at least half a million to this country. It seems that the only hitch in the whole business is the fact that at present, with the ordinary way of packing and binding, the wool bales do not keep their shape and thus they are difficult to stow. That is evidently a matter for the Department of Agriculture, through its experts, to investigate. These two figures added together very nearly equal the total of the Minister’s vote and surely the Minister might be reasonably proud if, through the investigations of his department, he caused that additional wealth to this country. I would like to remind the Minister that apparently he has forgotten to tell me that he is going to give a veterinary surgeon for East London.

I would like to hear from the Minister when he proposes to give us that promised and much-needed experimental station on the border, which has been asked and pressed for by every farmers’ association in that part. There are many reasons why an experimental station should be established on the border. The Minister is no doubt well aware that the conditions prevailing there are very different from those of any station which he has already established. Take the question of the production of wheat. I remember, in years gone by, in the East London and adjoining districts, wheat used to be grown by thousands of bags, but to-day, on account of the ravages of rust and other insect pests, little or none whatever is grown. Take the production of potatoes. I remember when the division of Kingwilliamstown was able to grow sufficient potatoes to supply practically the whole of the Cape Province. To-day it takes us all our time to produce sufficient potatoes for our own requirements. I would like to support the appeal of the hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.-Gen. Byron) for the appointment of a veterinary officer for East London. At the present time the veterinary officer at Kingwilliamstown has work to do in East London as well. I know that he is very much overworked, more especially now that the Veterinary Department has to do with sheep scab. I have another question to ask the Minister. This afternoon we heard a great deal from the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) in regard to prickly pear. I was astonished that the hon. member did not also mention the jointed cactus.

It is the same species.

It is not the same species by any manner of means. The prickly pear can well be got rid of ; in fact, many farmers use it for feeding their stock. They will never do that with jointed cactus. A couple of sessions ago a rather large and influential deputation of members of this House and others interviewed the Minister and pressed upon him the necessity of doing something to eradicate this pest. He promised to send an official to inquire into it, but I have not yet heard, and I would like to know what the results of his investigation have been. In the early days, when this plant was first known, the individual erf-holder would have been able to eradicate it, but it got beyond his power to do so, and then it was expected that the local authorities would be able to deal with it. It even got beyond their power to tackle the question, and now it is in the hands of the provincial council, and I can assure the House and the Minister that it won’t be long before it will get beyond the powers of the Provincial Council to deal with this pest. I would like to know whether the Minister can give us any information as to the position in connection with the plant called Helichresium, which grows on the Amatela mountains. For the information of the Minister, I may mention that the late Government engaged the services of Professor Schonland, of the Rhodes University, to investigate and report upon this plant, and he recommended that the area where this plant was growing should be fenced in, and that cattle should be not grazed there. I would like to know what the Minister proposes to do to prevent the extension of this plant over the hills about there.

I thank the Minister for the replies he has given to my questions, and I am sorry I have to put a few more; but my time had expired before I had finished. I wish to draw the Minister’s attention to the sale of grafted vines at Tokai Reformatory. Formerly they were put up to auction annually, but for the last couple of years tenders have been invited, and that is most unsatisfactory, because it puts distant buyers at a great disadvantage. I am very pleased to hear that the matter of the sulphur content—dried fruits for export—is engaging the Minister’s attention, and I hope the matter will be taken in hand without delay, because it is a most serious matter, particularly to your dried apricot, raisin and sultana exporters, who will be placed in a very awkward position, if, when they start exporting next year, they find that the sulphur content of their fruit is in excess of what is allowed into the English market.

I want to say a few words about the farm Armoedsvlakte in the Vryburg district, originally purchased in connection with the investigation of cattle disease. Years ago, this object was achieved, and on the farm there are now quite two hundred head of cattle. They are of the ordinary kind, and I would like to ask the Minister if it is not possible to provide that a good class of breeding cattle be kept there. The result would be that throughout wide expanses of the country good bulls could be bought in order to improve the class of cattle in Bechuanaland. Experience has taught us that the only future for Bechuanaland is cattle farming, but we farmers are not in a position to go to Grootfontein or Potchefstroom to buy stud bulls. The result is that we have a less valuable class of animal, where; as if the Minister assisted us we could improve our stock, and could produce fine animals. Recently people came from Barkly West, a distance of two hundred miles, to see how cattle were fed on bone meal at Armoedsvlakte, and they were much surprised that such a poor class of cattle were kept there, and that we had no breeding animals. I imagine that it is the duty of the Government to give the farmers a lead in this respect. If my suggestion were accepted by the Minister, it would be of great advantage to the district.

As was the case last year, so again now, are we having a long discussion about agriculture. Last year the Opposition raised a lot of dust about simultaneo is dipping and scab. I now want to ask the Minister a couple of questions, e.g., how many farmers gave up farming as a result of the simultaneous dipping and whether all the sheep died, and how much compensation the Government paid ? I want to congratulate the Minister on the success which he had. I expected the Opposition to ask these questions, but they remained quiet.

You passed an Indemnity Act.

hon. members talk on every conceivable subject, but I would like to ask the Minister what the actual result was. I also want to congratulate the Minister on the good result of the destruction of locusts, and I hope that he will become master of the new swarms of flying locusts.

There are two matters of the greatest importance to farmers which I want to bring to the notice of the Minister. The other day I asked the Minister about the dairy industry, and asked in connection with the recommendation of the superintendent whether the fee which had to be paid to his officials for taking tests in connection with the quality of the milk of cows would be reduced. The superintendent recommended that the fees should be considerably reduced. The Minister replied that he would consider the matter. The matter is of the greatest importance. The Minister must be very careful about the matter, because it costs the farmer a good deal in money and trouble. In my case, for instance, I had to go seventy-two miles to fetch the official to my farm. Then prevision has naturally to be made for his keep. The most important part of this matter is, however, that the farmers who submit their cows to the test and obtain a certificate from the department are much benefited, and it means a good deal to them. In this way, we bring it about that we have better cattle in this country, because if a farmer has a certificate that a cow has undergone the test then that cow is at least, worth from six to twelve ordinary cows. This, is a way of improving our stock, because the farmers will try to obtain stock which will undergo the test. Test of the milk products are made with reference to the quantity of the milk and the quality in so far as concerns the standard of butter. Tests are often applied at shows where they are decided by points. There points are given for the yield of milk and the quality of the butter-fat. I know that the Minister takes an interest in this matter and I hope that he will follow out the recommendation of the superintendent of the dairy industry. I would, however, like an answer from him to-day as to what he thinks of the matter. I would further like to say a few words about the freedom of the agriculturalist to sell his products without any hindrance. An agriculturalist who for instance plants trees and gets them ready for poles, or a farmer who is progressive and brings to the market the bark of the wattle tree, falls under the Factories Act as soon as he begins to saw the trees into pieces by means of a machine. I know that section 2. (2) of the Factories Act excludes agricultural pursuits, but a wrong idea certainly exists in this matter because in the instances mentioned by you the farmer comes under the Factories Act. To a question put by me a couple of weeks ago the answer was that farmers, if they produced their products for the use of people, were relieved from the application, of the Factories Act, but in other cases

The Factories Act comes under the Minister of Mines and Industries.

It is a matter affecting: agriculture.

The application of the Act falls under the Department of Mines.

But it is a product of agriculture. It concerns trees.

The hon. member cannot discuss that now.

I was under the impression that we could discuss the whole policy of the Minister. Will I be in order if I propose a reduction of the Minister’s salary ?

That will not, assist you.

Then I must leave the matter till later.

I want to ask the Minister in connection with the report of the Egg Commission, whether the department is of opinion that inspectors were in any way responsible for the inspection of the cooling chambers and if so, whether steps will be taken to see that, whenever inspectors punish people the persons actually responsible will be punished, because in such a case this will naturally be necessary.

Judging by his answer the Minister must have misunderstood me. His answer implied that I said that Stellenbosch should get all the guano. I did not say anything of the sort. I only want my district to obtain what it has a right to, but I pleaded specially for the grain districts and this does not affect my district so much, and so the Minister has obviously entirely misunderstood me. The average yield of guano is eight thousand tons per year, or eighty thousand bags, and I complained that two thousand and fifty-six bags were delivered to the State for the experimental farms. This is one-fortieth of the whole yield and the experimental stations were established to teach us how to obtain nitrogen from the air and to work it into the ground. I do not, as the Minister seems to think, grudge-the other provinces a share of the guano, but I merely want to show that last year two farmers in the Transvaal made requests for six thousand bags of guano or a thirtieth part of the whole yield. That was for only two men in the Transvaal.

Did they get it?

That is another matter, but if they could have obtained a ton they would have taken it. This shows that the demand for guano, is more than the yield. I will concede this to the Minister, and I am a wine farmer, that if wine farmers ask for guano for their vineyards they should not get a single bag. What is necessary for plantations, the growing of grain and gardening, they should naturally be provided with, but it is certainly not necessary for vineyards which can be worked with other manures. As to the sugar farmers in Natal the Minister should not give them a single bag. They can get along quite well with Chilian saltpetre.

And the mealie farmers ?

If they want a little, they can have it, but they can get along quite well without it. Then it is said that the profit derived from guano is not made out of guano but out of seal skins. I live near the coast, and I and everybody else living near the coast, experts all of us, will say that the profit on seal skins is no profit at all, but a loss to the country. I think that a seal is of some value for its skin ; but he consumes a hundred times his weight in fish and I say to the Minister that it would be an excellent thing if he could put an end to the seals. The profit on the skins would be more than made good by means of a large sale of fish, because more fish would come on to the market. I also want to say something about citrus fruits. It amazes me that the farmers on the other side are so quiet about this. There is a certain person who wishes to swallow up South Africa. At any rate he will try, but I do not know whether he will succeed. I will mention his name, lie is Mr. Schlesinger.

He is now in Russia.

Perhaps he is busy in Russia now, but if he comes back then he will make South Africa look out. He is busy trying to do what Henry Jones did.

Did he also swallow up South Africa ?

He got control of the cooling chambers of Australia and New Zealand, and the farmers there were compelled to sell-their fruit to him at a price fixed by him. That is Mr. Schlesinger's plan here. We have seen what happened to the Bill dealing with the control of the export of fruit. This was passed by this House almost unanimously Then one noticed Mr. Schlesinger in the parliamentary lobbies and after that the Bill very nearly failed to go through the Senate. If it had not been for the Opposition there we would have perhaps been without this Act to-day. If this man's power over our worthy fathers in the Senate is so great how much power will he not have over the ordinary man in the street to enable him to buy up the cooling chambers. I hope that the Minister will keep this matter before him. I know he is now aweke. There is more citrus fruit in the Transvaal than in the Cape Province. I warn him, “Keep your eye on Schlesinger.”

For two years I have endeavoured to get a veterinary surgeon at Aliwal North. Last year I was told that as soon as one was available we would get one. I was informed last week that this man has been placed at Burghersdorp instead. I think it must be obvious to the Minister and to the department that it is highly essential to have a man placed at Aliwal North. We have a large district extending beyond Aliwal North, to Barkly East, Jamestown, Lady Grey and Herschel ; are we to be dependent upon the man at Burghersdorp ?

Only 36 miles.

Yes, but how far from the other places named? I hope the Minister will look into the matter, and satisfy himself whether we are entitled to the services of a veterinary surgeon at Aliwal North or not. We have heard a great deal said about scrub cattle in the Union, and the Minister has been urged to adopt a very comprehensive scheme to import stud bulls for the purposes of improving our breed ; but this question needs to be approached, always giving due consideration to the circumstances and the conditions of this country. About 90 per cent., I suppose, of the land is not arable. Just imagine placing a highly bred imported animal on the veld near Prince Albert District—in a very short time he would be skin and bone and could not survive in such parts. We want cattle with sufficient activity to hunt for their food. In my district not 10 per cent, of the land is arable, and we need that to keep stock alive during the spring and winter time. In dairying districts where they can feed their cattle and give them suitable attention, the type of beast to which reference has been made may be desirable. We must cultivate a type of animal which will thrive on the natural grasses and vegetation of the country. It is the second-grade stuff for which provision should be made, and we shall always have that class of animal in this country. The way which has suggested itself to me as likely to provide a suitable market for our scrub cattle is the one put forward by Col. Pitchford, who about two years ago, demonstrated a large variety of by-products obtainable from ordinary second-grade beasts. We are never going to bring the bulk of our average cattle on the veld up to first-class slaughter conditions. Another point, cattle lose condition in transit by rail to the coast and to other markets. They get into a state of nervous fear and excitement, and I don’t wonder at it, because they are in jeopardy and fear all the time. The animals should be slaughtered up-country, but since they have to travel, as they do, by rail they should be tied up in the trucks so that they are unable to injure one another. [Time limit.]

There is something that I would like very much to bring to the notice of the Minister. There are parts of the country where the Fencing Act of 1912 is in force, but where the Fencing Act of 1922 is not in force. The circumstances there are not such as to permit the Act of 1922 being brought into force. This is the case for various reasons, among others, because the farmers are perhaps too poor. In any case, the new Act has not been put into force in those parts. Now there are farmers who want to enclose their farms with jackal-proof fencing at their own cost and after arrangement with their neighbours. Some farms however border on public outspans which belong to the provincial councils. When a farmer wants to enclose his farm with jackal-proof fencing and has made arrangements with his neighbours then the provincial council is not prepared to pay half of the expense of the fence along the public outspans. The 1922 Act is not in force there and so the divisional council is not bound to pay. I do not ask the Minister to give his answer to-night, but I would like him to make a note of it, and to consider during the recess whether he will not put a sum of money on the estimates for the purpose of assisting the persons who want to enclose their farms with jackal-proof fencing where the farms border on public outspans. And there is another thing. I want to tell the Minister, that there was in one of my districts a little dissatisfaction in connection with scab, because the Minister ordered simultaneous dipping there. As a result thereof, however, the district is clean and protected, and the farmers now can move their sheep to other protected districts. Simultaneous dipping was thus a great success in that one district, because it is now protected whereas formerly it was not, and so I want to rejoice over the Minister’s attempt to help the farmer, and I think that many farmers in the country have good reason to be satisfied with the Minister’s administration. There is another way in which the Minister can assist the farmers in my district. I do not know whether it was the case in other constituencies, but the caterpillar plague was very bad, not only on the farms of the ordinary fruit farmers, but also on the farms in the Karoo. I know that the Minister’s experts were there and helped the people with advice, but I would like to ask the Minister if he cannot give a little more assistance in this connection. In connection with the fight against scab and locusts the State has spent large sums of money. Cannot the Minister afford a little help here also by sending persons to fight the plague and to study it a little more than hitherto? The caterpillar plague must not only be studied more deeply, but officials should be sent to assist the people to fight the plague.

Is the Minister in a position to give us information about the mission of Mr. Schlesinger to Russia? There is a widespread impression that the mission has to do with she export of meat, and that being so and the question so vitally affecting the farming industry we hope the Minister will be able to safeguard the interests of the farmers against further exploitation. We have had a most striking tribute to Mr. Schlesinger by the hon, member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden), who recently said that if Mr. Schlesinger opened up trade with Russia he would kiss Mr. Schlesinger’s hand. Whether the hon, member kissed Mr. Schlesinger’s hand, elbow or any other part of his body it would seem to be rather an unnecessarily affectionate way of showing his appreciation of Mr. Schlesinger’s undoubted ability. He might not be polite enough to allow his hand or any other part of him to be kissed, so the hon. member may rest content with having shown his gratitude in advance. Mr. Kuper, who accompanies Mr. Schlesinger, is a brother of Mr. Morris Kuper of the Fresh Meat Supply Company of Johannesburg, and it is generally held on the Rand that a large company is to be formed with a capital of £500,000 in which Mr. Schlesinger and the Union Cold Storage will participate. The Minister is to be blamed for his policy on two questions of vital importance to the farming industry, the first being that of surplus cattle in the Union, and meat export, and the second the dairy industry. Within a very short time of the Minister’s taking office, I introduced a motion asking for the appointment of a special commission to report on the best means of dealing with the problem of the surplus of horned cattle in the Union in the interests of the consumer and producer, and the possibility of the utilization as a factor in the solution of the problem of the Watkins-Pitchford method of converting South African beef into a series of meat-foods of acknowledged value. The motion, seconded by the hon. member for Kroonstad (Mr. Werth), was a non-political one and was generally supported. The Minister replied that the Board of Trade had been appointed to investigate the whole of the meat question, and that we must be content to abide by the result of that investigation. In the meantime a retrogressive step has been taken by the abolition of the bounty on the export of meat in this country. The report of the Board of Trade and Industries on the meat question was a valuable document, which showed that a very full investigation had been made. Whilst not being prepared to agree with every recommendation contained in the report, it is fair to ask the Minister what his policy is to be on that document. The commission recommended the establishment of co-operative companies, strong co-operative meat producers’ associations and the erection of Government cold storage works at the ports and some central spots inland. It was also recommended that an export trade should be developed with Italy, and that the Minister should adopt with regard to beef extract and by-products certain recommendations contained in a confidential memorandum. We do not, however, know the contents of that confidential memorandum. The Watkins-Pitchford process would be very valuable in dealing with a large class of cattle unsuitable for export, which could only be absorbed by markets overseas if concerted into a more acceptable form, and that is what the process aims at doing. The last report of the Land Bank is the most complete stocktaking of the agricultural industry in South Africa that has yet been presented to us. The report teems with information of a valuable character, and I should be much more confident of the Minister’s ability to take a broad view of his duties, if he were imbued with the same spirit as that which animates the members of the board of the Land Bank. ‘The personnel of the board inspires confidence on all sides of the House. The report speaks of the very grave condition of the meat industry and indicates the hopeless position that South Africa is in in regard to our large quantities of surplus livestock. They mention that we have 10,000,000 head of cattle which are unsuitable for export, and that the only remedy appears to be to improve the quality of beef so that it is acceptable on the world’s markets. It has been claimed for the Minister of Agriculture that he is the best Minister of Agriculture that we have ever had. That claim has been based upon what he has done in regard to the locust invasion and the eradication of scab. Those are two subjects upon which he has undoubtedly done hard work, but it seems to me to be altogether too extravagant a claim when we come to examine the figures. [Time limit.]

I am afraid that if I spoke my own language the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick) would not understand me. I condole wholeheartedly with the hon. member in his failure to recognize facts. Last year he made thirteen speeches upon the eradication of scab urging upon the Minister to let scab live.

No.

Now the hon. member comes and congratulates him. If the Minister had adopted the methods that were suggested by the hon. member for Illovo—

On the point of personal explanation, the hon. member (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) entirely misrepresents what I have said on the scab question. I never once urged that the Minister should let scab live and the hon. member knows it very well.

The methods that were suggested by the hon. member for Illovo in his attempts to avoid the eradication of scab in Natal were methods which suggested that we should let scab live. I am very pleased to know that the Minister did not accept those suggestions, in spite of the 13 speeches of the hon. member for Illovo. I am very pleased that the hon. member is sportsman enough to admit that the Minister has eradicated scab, at all events as far as Natal is concerned.

You are absolutely wrong.

If scab is not eradicated in Natal, with the adequate rainfall that they have got and the intelligent farmers engaged there, the sooner the Minister takes steps for the eradication of scab in Natal, the better for this country. I say that for any man to still grow scab or still plead for scab, as the hon. member for Illovo did, is a disgrace. The hon. member for Illovo is worried about Mr. Schlesinger. I said, and I repeat here, that I would willingly kiss the hand of Mr. Schlesinger if he succeeds in getting a market for our wool in Russia. It has been reported in the press that Russia would be in a position to buy from South Africa £10,000,000 worth of wool. I would give Mr. Schlesinger my very best blessing if he succeeds in Russia in disposing of some of our wool. We have now recognized, and the world has recognized, that our only market is not in Bradford, and should not be in Bradford, especially under present conditions. If Russia agrees to buy wool, the markets are open to her, and we can supply her.

Are you prepared to give her credit ?

We don’t give Russia credit. If she wants credit, she can get it from the banks. I would remind the hon. member for Illovo that there was another country to which he and the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) had all the antagonism in the world, and to which we sent a deputation a few years back to try and get rid of our wool in 1920. The men we sent to Germany were not in sympathy with the farmers of South Africa. When the German Government said they would be prepared to buy our wool on certain conditions) provided we bought railway rolling material, which they undertook to sell at 20 per cent, less than the British manufacturer could, they ran away from Germany. The world now recognizes that the best wool which is produced in the world is produced in South Africa.

Why does not Russia come here ?

She is quite welcome. We will welcome her with open arms. As for the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close), I do not suppose he knows the difference between wool and grass. Why not let Russia come here ?

They have not got the cash.

There are many buyers of wool in South Africa who have not got the cash, but they get the facilities all the same. I say that scab must be eradicated, even if they have to resort to the most extreme measures, as they did in Australia.

What was that ?

To kill the sheep and bury them three feet under the ground. What a disgrace it is to any country in the world to still have scab.

And yet you call yourself a farmer.

Yes, I do. I would be pleased if my hon. friend would pay a visit, not alone to my farm, but to any farm in the Midlands.

The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) made an accusation against the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick) to-night, but I think that the accusation is against all the hon. members on this side of the House, viz., that they want scab to continue. That is absolutely not so. Our criticism of the Minister last year was with regard to the method followed in fighting scab. When the Minister gave effect to simultaneous dipping last year, he was merely following our advice. In the Cape Province he had it done under proper control. In Natal, however, he allowed the farmers to do the dipping, themselves. The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet said that we should sell our wool to Moscow. He can do so if he wishes, but I will not. The hon. member talks of the deputation sent to Germany to open a wool-market for us. It seems to me that in this respect the hon. member is as mistaken as he was to-day when he criticized his own Minister. I think that his criticism of the Minister was very unfair when he said that the Minister made the farmers pay for the experts to pick out rams. The hon. member read the report wrongly, and it seems to me that he misunderstands many things. The Minister said that it was not so, but the hon. member said that the Auditor-General’s report for, 1925 said that it was so. The fact is that the Auditor-General’s department reported that the Government had decided to discontinue the charge.

That is what I said.

You said that they had ; to pay now The experts can do it for nothing now, since January. That shows how much the hon. member comes into touch with the farmers in the Midlands, because for a year and a half the wool-farmers, have been entitled to obtain the experts to pick out rams without paying. This is the result of the good work of the Minister of Agriculture. The hon. member for Graaff-Reinet boasted that he would kiss Mr, Schlesinger’s hand. In the country he wages war against the, capitalists, but here he is ready to kiss a capitalist’s hand. His greatest criticism in the country is directed against the capitalists. I agree with the hon. member for Illovo that Mr. Schlesinger will refuse to have his hand kissed;, or any other part of his body. The Minister of Agriculture to-night gave expression to a threat because I made some remarks about the appointment of Mr. Clark. The Minister says that because of my criticism he is going to appoint only unilingual officials in Cradock. Just imagine a Minister making a threat because of my speech. As a result thereof he wants to punish the people of Cradock and send unilingual persons there. I ask whether the Minister can punish the public because of anything said by me in this Housed I hope the people of Cradock will hear of this. I can assure the Minister that, Cradock has imposed confidence in me and the policy of this side of the House.

Your constituency will not do that at the next election.

They will do, it again.

Last year a motion of no confidence in you was passed at Cradock.

I will not talk about that, but the hon. member will see what happens at the next election. I will just tell my hon. friend that the Cradock public is not so circumscribed as he thinks. The Cradock farmers seek after a knowledge of farming, and they are not so circumscribed as the Minister. The Minister has entirely missed my point. I did not criticize him in connection, with unilingualism or bilingualism, but because he acted as he did in spite of the report of his own department, which said that it is absolutely wrong that a person who has received a bursary Is not to be taken into the Government service, because, according to the contract, he has to repay what was spent on his education if he does not enter the Government service. In Mr, Clark’s case, the Minister is satisfied that the State should lose £760. That is my complaint against the Minister. America does not hesitate to take this man into its service, and America is a much bigger country than South Africa, and has greater statesman than the Minister is. America is willing to make use of his services. My complaint against the Minister is that Mr. Clark obtained splendid results in his examinations, and, according to Mr. Joubert’s report—the Minister will not deny that he is a very honourable man and also very responsible—he knows the second language, although he is perhaps notable to give lectures in that language. My complaint is that the Minister is ready, to throw away £760;

I am quite satisfied.

I hope my electors will hear how the country’s money is being wasted.

What about Mr. Burton’s flour case?

There are still a couple of matters which I want to bring to the notice of the Minister in Connection with the wheat experimental stations which he has set up in the Malmesbury district. According to the report of the Agricultural Department, it appears that here in the Western Province we can only produce bushels to the acre, which compares very unfavourably with other countries. In Canada, for instance, the yield is 12 bushels per acre. According to the information which the public has, the Minister has experimental stations in the Free State mealie areas and in the wheat districts of the Western Province. The public wishes to have information how long it will take to carry out the experiments, and what advantage it will be to the farmers. [Time limit.]

The hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. C. Van Heerden) is in the same unfortunate position as his companion, the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick). It seems to me that the last member has urged him on. I now ask the Minister to make it clear to the member as to whether it is not just as I have said, and whether it is not true that for a long time people had to pay for the services of the expert, and that later on the Minister put the matter right.

I admit that.

But he was so very much upset, and made a number of accusations. The hon. member should visit Cradock a little. Does he want to make another challenge ? He is so boastful. Let him challenge, and he will suffer the same defeat as against the hon. member for Albert (Mr. Steytler) last year. I challenge him. If he gives up his seat, I will pay his expenses if I do not defeat him in his constituency. He here makes remarks about the Minister jumping about.

The hon. member must address the chair.

Excuse me. I say that if the Minister had jumped about, then we would have had a large amount of scab to-day. I repeat here that I am against capitalists, but if any capitalist finds additional markets for the farmers, even in Moscow, I shall welcome them. I am sorry for the hon. member. He should not make these accusations, because he gets more and more into trouble.

I want to draw attention to a matter of some importance, which affects my constituents—the establishment of a subtropical experimental station in Zululand. I think the Minister has already been approached on the matter. Years ago there was an experimental station to the south of Durban, established by the Natal Government, the purpose of which was to carry out experiments in sub-tropical agriculture, but it was in the wrong place climatically and was of very little value to the local sugar industry. Recently it was closed down. Where the station is required is in the sub-tropical belt of Zululand which is largely settled by settlers placed on the land by the Government, and as the Minister has been to the north of Zululand, I hope he will appreciate the position there. These settlers took up the land to grow cotton, and after much expenditure and disappointment they have now to look round for an alternative crop to cotton, which will enable them to get a living. They are looking to the Government for advice as to what is the best to grow. They are unable themselves to carry on the experiments necessary. In most cases the £2,000 which they were all required to possess before obtaining the land has been spent in pioneering. The Government in replying to their request has stated it? intention of establishing a station in the Transvaal. The establishment of a station in the Transvaal is not going to be of much help. It will be too far from the sea, and the best crops to be grown in Zululand can be established by experiment only in a sub-tropical area. Such a station is of enormous economic value to the millions of acres which can be developed in crop-production'—in Zululand. The station could be established without any great expense. With our Zululand rivers and the enormous possibilities of irrigation, there is every possibility of that area being one of the most fertile places in the Union for economic production. The rainfall is very, erratic, and limited as they are to one crop, the position is very hazardous. I therefore hope the Minister will reconsider the representations which have been made to him on this subject. The Minister of Lands will, I am sure, lend his support to this application.

Since a large portion of Bechuanaland falls in my constituency I would like to support the request made in the interest of the farmers of Bechuanaland that class animals should be placed on Armoedsvlakte which would be advantageous to the whole of Bechuanaland. The farm was originally destined for the investigation of cattle diseases. But in the last five years we haven’t had any cattle diseases and seeing that the danger has passed we can breed class cattle there, and that will help the farmers to obtain good bulls for the purpose of improving the blood of our stock. This is of great importance, especially because Bechuanaland is undoubtedly the best cattle district in South Africa. We have had to fight drought, and cattle diseases but not during the last four or five years, and consequently we have an opportunity of improving the class of cattle there and breeding stock suitable for export to the European markets, when our own internal markets have been provided for. I hope that the Minister will come to our assistance. We obtain very little in that expansive stretch of country,

I hope that the Minister will not be so angry with me again.

I am never angry.

The Minister got angry and called me a grumbler although he knows that I am not a grumbler. I would like to say something more about sheep inspectors. The hon. member for Witbank, (Mr. A. I. E. de Villiers) asked questions in connection with simultaneous dipping and made a great fuss about that. Last year I asked the Minister to institute a thorough enquiry into the losses that had been suffered. He did not do this. If he had, he would have found in my district, at least, many instances of loss and not merely that four sheep had died as the result of simultaneous dipping but that hundreds had died and that much more damage was suffered than he admits. Last year we were not against simultaneous dipping hut against the methods thereof. I do not now want to go into that any further ; it rained a good deal and we pleaded that the dipping should be postponed. If that had been done the losses would not have been so great. The matter is, however, now closed. An Act has been passed and no one can take proceedings. I hope, however, that the Minister will be more careful in the future. Now I see that the Minister employs 18 senior inspectors and that their total salaries amount to £10,888. When the Minister came into power he said that he was going to discharge the senior sheep inspectors. He certainly did that, because they were Saps, but now he goes on and places 18 under the Veterinary Department and I would like to know what the difference is between the previous and the present senior inspectors and what saving has been effected. Then I see again that there are 387 sheep inspectors in the department and that their allowances amount to £131,861. I do not want to labour this point and to say that that is too much, but I ask whether some of them do not obtain too much and others too little. I do not say that the salaries should be increased, but some of them have very large areas under them and in such cases the salary of £25 per month is small, while others have small districts and do not earn so much. Can’t we perhaps make some change in the classification. And now a few words about the caterpillar plague in the Transvaal. I can assure the Minister that the plague is very extensive and the losses enormous. I would almost say that the plague is just as great as that of the locusts. To combat it thousands of pounds are spent, but the plague occasions very great damage. I have seen large patches of mealies where the mealies stood seven or eight feet high. The caterpillars came and it looked as if the mealies had been trodden down by cattle. All the plants were overthrown and the mealies devoured. I would ask the Minister to send experts out to see what can be done. The position is very serious, particularly after dry seasons. I have spoken to the persons in these districts and they say that if they get in 40 per cent, of their harvest they will be glad. The farmers obtained a considerable amount of fertilizer to grow mealies and spent hundreds and thousands of pounds. I would also like to know what the Minister is going to do in connection with the export of our mealies. If provision is not made for the farmers to obtain a good price then numbers of them will have to throw up the sponge. Then I want to say further that the carriage on fertilizers is so expensive. I know this falls under the Department of Railways, but the two departments overlap so much that I may bring the matter to the notice of the Minister of Agriculture. Grain bags cost 1s. 6d., and the farmers have to pay a l½d. for the carriage thereof. If a large number are purchased it comes to a pretty fair figure. I hope the Minister will be able to do something in this connection. We farmers are in a critical position and must be assisted as much as possible.

There is a very urgent need in the border districts for an experimental farm. The farmers of that very progressive district have no nearer source of practical information than Grootfontein, and as the districts vary so much in climate, altitude and rainfall, that information—however applicable to Grootfontein—may not apply to districts at or near sea-level. It is well-known, for instance, that lucerne behaves quite differently for each additional 2,000 feet altitude. Cotton, which may be one of the big products of South Africa in the near future, will grow in the Border districts, but a lot of information is still required as to the most suitable localities for it. Above all, experiments in animal husbandry and fertilizers are essential. We are in the unenviable position of having the lowest crop return per acre of mealies and wheat in the whole world, and that is almost entirely due to frequent cropping and the non-utilization of farmyard manures. We are still importing £2,000,000 worth of bread stuffs every year. There seems little doubt that if experiments were continued for the discovery of rust-proof varieties of wheat we might improve that position. Our total imports of foodstuffs are £7,500,000 worth per annum. We import into this country, where cattle are superabundant, £261,000 of meat alone and £292,000 worth of condensed milk. In small matters as pickles, salad oil and other such things we import no less than £200,000 worth in the course of the year. An experimental station would do a great deal towards enabling farmers to make a big hole in this £7,500,000 worth of foodstuffs that are imported every year. You have people on the Border who would take the utmost advantage of an experimental station, if one were established, and the results would be seen in the increased production of their farms, thus adding to the general wealth of the country.

The hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. C. van Heerden) has found fault with the Minister for saying that he will send an unilingual official to Cradock. Wily does the hon. member now say that that will be a punishment ? According to him it need not be a punishment, because he finds fault if the Minister does not appoint an unilingual official. In this instance he asks that an unilingual official be appointed, and then finds fault with the Minister and says: “You can obtain unilingual officials.” The hon. member cannot have it both ways. He should go to Cradock and tell the people that he is willing to have an unilingual official. He says that money is wasted because Mr. Clark has not been appointed. But then he should relate how the previous Government wasted money because it was the previous Government which sent this person overseas for further study, although he was unilingual, and which wanted to appoint him to the Department of Agriculture, where it is absolutely necessary that the officials should be bilingual. So really the blame for the loss of £760 is not to be attributed to the present, but to the previous Government. Then there is also the case of Mr. Promnitz which I want to refer to again. The Minister is under a wrong impression if he thinks that the public demand his reinstatement. They merely expressed their views, and this redounds greatly to Mr. Promnitz’s credit. The individual who has to compel people to dip is placed in a difficult position, and it is not easy to please the public; and, in this instance, it is reported that the public was quite satisfied. Because Mr. Primrose was in the service for 15 years, it is now asked that the Minister should give him another chance, although he acted wrongly. I want to bring something further to the notice of the Minister in this connection. A month before the resignation took place, this official was away on leave, which was the only vacation which he had had during 15 years. For that month then he was not there, and during the previous two months he was engaged with an official of the Agricultural Department, who is an excellent official, who went around teaching all the dip inspectors what scab is and how it should be dealt with. And so Mr. Primrose was engaged for the previous three months on another kind of work. I do not ask the Minister to give his answer now and to make promises, but I want to bring the matter to the notice of the Minister, and I hope that he will look into it.

On page 140, under D.7, I see that the estimate for bags, meaning empty guano bags, is double. Does that mean that the guano output this year will be doubled? I hope so.

The price of the bag is higher.

I see that a profit of £22,275 has been made out of the guano islands. I am sure that the Minister does not agree that the farmers should be taxed to that extent, because this is taxing a primary industry. The farmer has got to compete against the whole world, and he is entitled to get this fertilizer at as cheap a rate as possible. The Government have no right to make that profit out of the farmer. In my constituency there is a great deal of disappointment among the farmers because they have not been able to get this guano. This fertilizer is keenly sought after, and year after year the farmers in my constituency have been left. I would suggest to the Minister that he should allocate a certain proportion of the product to each province.

I am going to give the Minister the benefit of the doubt, and accept it that he misunderstood me this afternoon. He accused me of saying that we are against the competition of the Glen, because they were running their contest much cheaper than we can run it If the Minister had listened carefully to what I did say, he would know that my point was that the Government competitions are valueless to the public, and can be run more cheaply. At the end of the season they say they have made a profit. They tell us nothing as to what the competition cost, what the expense of feeding the birds was, what they made out of the egg production, and nothing is told the farmer as to how he can run his poultry department at an economic profit. I ask the Minister again whether he is prepared to tell us that in future the Government competitions will be run on something like business lines and, if they are not run on business lines, as the competitions of the societies are, whether he is prepared to see that the Government competitions cost the public the same as our competitions, and not bring the Government, contests into competition with ours. We had no help from the Government when we erected our building. I would like the Minister to go and see those buildings. We have run these competitions on business lines for the benefit of the public, and we tell the public every month what is happening there. We have to compete with the Government, who, at the end of the season tell us that they have made a profit, and that is as far as we get.

Under the item of cattle breeding and agriculture, there appears to be one official for summer grain and another for winter grain. I see that these officials are at an experimental station; One finds that there are farmers who cultivate grain in the winter and those who cultivate grain in the summer, but anyone who farms would think that one man would be sufficient for this, purpose, because if a man is qualified as a winter grain farmer then he should also be qualified as a summer grain farmer. So here we have on one farm two officials ; one of whom is used for winter grain and the other for summer grain. Is one to understand that the one does nothing in the winter and the other nothing in the summer ? It may be that they are employed on two different experimental farms —on one of which winter grain is cultivated and on the other summer grain. Now I should like to know from the Minister whether these two officials are employed on one or two farms because it beats me that two persons with equal qualifications should be employed for special purposes, such as winter grain and summer grain. Any farmer could do both jobs because these two sorts of grain are not grown at the same time. There are also a couple of other matters to which I want to refer. Last year a new section was established under the Department of Agriculture, viz., the section of the Economics of Agriculture and Markets. We see that this section was established with an expenditure of £14,000 per year, and this amount has this year increased to £21,000. We see that the expense is increasing enormously. If it goes on like this, in a few year’s time the expense will be £50,000 per year. Now I would like to know from the Minister if he can inform the outside public what the duties of this section are, because when it was called into existence, the farmers outside said that matters would go very much better with them, because a section has been established under qualified persons to go into the economic interests of the farmers, in order to bring about an improvement in the organization of farming and the marketing of farming products. What is the position to-day? Our markets have never been in such a sad condition, and the farmers are unable to bring on to the markets anything out of which they can make a living. The people outside, want enlightenment about this section, and I will be glad if the Minister would tell us what it has done up to now. Has it issued a report ? I haven’t seen one. All that I have seen are—

placards on the railway stations, but if that is all this section does, it is a matter of Very great expense, because every person will eat a lot of fruit if he can. The farmers would like to have this information. I know mare Or less, but I would like the Minister to make it quite clear so, that the people may see what they can expect from this section in the future.

I wish to deal with the claim that the Minister had been conspicuously successful in stamping out the locust invasion. There is no doubt he was quite active, but his predecessor was quite as active, and, in fact, exterminated a larger number of swarms at less cost. That is shown in the report of the Land Bank, which says that the number of swarms destroyed in the year ending 1925 was 953,000 at a cost of £377,000. In the previous year 961,000 were destroyed at a cost of £324,000, so that this tremendous advertisement that the Minister has had of being the only man who destroyed the locusts is not in accordance with figures from the Land Bank which correspond with the figures published in the report of the Department of Agriculture. The Chief of the Division of Entomology, who must be taken as authoritative, says that there are signs that the present cyclical visitation of this pest is collapsing, and that years of comparative immunity may soon be expected. That means that the cycle of infestation is coming to an end, and that if we are to have immunity from the locusts, as in the past, that immunity is due very largely to the fact that the cycle of infestation has ended. So I do not think we can claim that the Minister has been so much responsible for the disappearance of the locusts as has been claimed for him. In regard to scab, the hon, member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden), who is guaranteed to put you wrong on anything, and imagines that emphatic re-assertion of a misstatement constitutes proof, said that I had asked that scab might live. He was not in the House then, and probably speaks on this occasion, as he so often does, from a total ignorance of what he is discussing, but, as a matter of fact, any member who was in this House will remember that the dispute between the Minister and myself was that damage had been done in the process of compulsory dipping, and that we were not prepared to condone that until he paid compensation. I am glad to say that the Minister realized during the recess that compensation was fairly payable to a number of people, and a larger number of people received compensation in my district than in any other, so that the 13 speeches I am said to have made on the losses of my people are to be excused under the circumstances; at any rate, they brought their reward. The Board of Trade and Industries report on the meat industry is very important. It recommends a definite programme of action by the Government, and it seems to me that the Minister, in fairness to the industry and the people who are waiting for a pronouncement from him, should declare his policy on this question of the meat industry, and what he intends to do for the salvation of the farmers. The Land Bank report indicates that the mere establishment of cold storage as recommended by the Board Of Trade and industries will not be sufficient, without a considerable improvement in the stocking of the country by the distribution of good bulls. That is a side that the Minister should give attention to, but with the machinery at his disposal—the entire machinery of the Land Bank, and it is a very far-reaching machinery, and Very useful, providing loans for silos, fencing, dipping-tanks—it seems to me the Minister might adopt a forward policy that would be the salvation of this country. We speak loosely of scrub stock, little realizing that scrub stock really are the stock which are ill-fed and ill-nourished, and that very often a well-bred animal may be classed as scrub through Want of nourishment. The pastures of this country have been impoverished from year to year by over-grazing. If the Minister would hold out some inducement for the regrassing of areas, he would do a great deal of good to the meat and dairying industries. Some experiments have been carried on in my district in laying down grass from other parts of Africa which have proved very successful. At a recent inspection on behalf of the Friesland Breeders’ Association, the inspector made a remark that a certain owner must have done his cattle remarkably well. That owner had fed his cattle on nothing but kikuyu grass. He established his paddocks with that grass, and nothing else, and the Minister should hold out some inducement for the regrassing of farms. We have a Very small and very disappointing development of silo building in South Africa. The Land Bank was established by the Minister of Agriculture, the late Gen. Botha, and it has proved a better means of keeping people on the land than any means yet thought of, and it has Saved the existence and the future of many of the best farmers in the country to-day, and will Continue to do so. The development has been in the hands of successive Ministers who came after Gen. Botha, and the recently-issued report of the Land Bank testifies to the wisdom of introducing the various facilities for the assistance of farmers, and it comments on the very satisfactory results achieved. Among other results, the members of the board comment upon the introduction of jackal-proof fencing, provision for which was made under the regime of the right hon. the member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt), and one Would wish that the present Minister would take a broad view of his responsibilities and endeavour to look ahead and to the development of the meat industries and dairying, upon which so large a class of the farming people are dependent. The meat markets throughout South Africa are glutted, and dairying is gravely depressed. Let me commend to him the necessity of doing more practical work in connection with the marketing of farm produce; We have a most expensive department established by the Minister himself, and for which he must take responsibility, which has a personnel of 39, consisting of nine economists, 11 inspectors and three market officers, and with an annual expenditure of over £17,000. Up to now the practical result has been very disappointing indeed. We have markets in various parts of the Union being indifferently run and conducing very little to the advantage of the farmer. The Land Bank report observes that the agricultural industry-to-day makes a poorer return than any other, partly owing to the uncertain climatic conditions, and partly owing to the faulty arrangement of marketing products. If the gentlemen employed in the Markets Division would go about the country visiting markets and making practical suggestions for improvement, if they are able to, the farmers would have something to thank them for. [Time limit.]

I just want to mention something which I have brought personally to the notice of the Minister, viz., the establishment of an experimental station for tobacco culture at Oudtshoorn. The Minister has already greatly assisted the tobacco farmers by the support given them in connection with the co-operative societies, and we are very thankful to him, but we feel that if the industry is to develop further then we must have support and advice in scientific matters. There is a great future for tobacco farming in South Africa. Our production from 1911 up to last year fluctuated between 9,000,000 lbs. to 16,000,000 lbs. per year. The whole world production is 2,700,000,000 lbs., and we can therefore see what a small percentage we produce. The ground is suitable, and much more can he done in this direction. Therefore, we feel that we can make a special claim on the Department of Agriculture to assist so that tobacco culture should be increased and improved. The market in South Africa in respect of certain grades is already over-supplied, and therefore we must apply ourselves to such treatment and manufacture of our tobacco as to make it suitable for foreign markets. For that purpose, certain experiments and advice are necessary, and we therefore feel that we require an experimental station, by which the farmers can learn how to plant and manipulate tobacco. The Minister may say that we are making experiments in the Transvaal, but our circumstances and our ground here are so different from those parts that it is necessary for us to have an experimental farm in the Cape Province for the virginia kinds. The Minister knows that formerly the south-western districts exclusively devoted themselves to ostrich farming, but, on account of the bad market, it is now necessary for us to take a different line, and the cultivation of tobacco is one of the industries which has arisen. As regards the dairy industry, we also want assistance from the Government. Attempts are being made to develop dairy industry in our part. We already have a company engaged there in erecting a box factory, and we also hope to soon have a factory for condensed milk, but Government encouragement is necessary. The farmers appear not to have sufficient confidence in the industry, and the Minister should favourably consider giving the farmers an allowance which will make up the difference between what the factories pay, and the farmers must have, in order to sell the milk at an economic price. When once the confidence of the farmers has been gained and they have improved their production methods, the industry will be able to stand on its own legs.

I see under D.7, Freight for Guano, £13,000. At that rate it is 35s. per ton, which seems exceptionally high, in view of the freight obtainable to Australia which is anything from 25s. to 30s. per ton. Is there any possibility of using our own boats? It would cheapen the article considerably. It requires the attention of the Minister’s department. Then there is an item £6,750 for grain bags. He estimates production of 7,500 tons, equivalent to 75,000 grain bags at 1s. 10d. per bag. I think everybody will agree with me that this is an absolutely ridiculous price. It is very foolish to buy bags when the market has a sagging tendency, and he will save at least 9d. to 10d. per bag. Farmers complain of the price of guano, and I submit that the price can be lowered considerably in view of the huge profit being made by the Government. It may be argued that a profit is made on sealskins and penguin eggs, but there is no reason why a profit should be made on an article such as guano which is produced by nature and which is required for the progagation of crops. The guano from the islands is very good for wheat-growing purposes, hut it costs £7 a ton as compared with super phosphates which can be imported for £3 10s. or £3 12s. 6d. a ton.

But what is the value of the guano against the imported fertiliser ?

It is necessary that the farmers should be assisted by being able to obtain guano at a reasonable price, and if this is done the country will benefit considerably. It is absolutely ridiculous for the Government to pay 35s. a ton for the conveyance of the guano from the islands to the mainland. There is a difficulty in obtaining supplies of guano, which can be avoided by storing for six or nine months without impairing its strength.

It has just been mentioned by the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick) that the year before last a large number of swarms of locusts were destroyed more than in the year following. It is quite right to quote a departmental report when one wants to establish facts. The report unfortunately makes no mention of how many locusts there were in each swarm, consequently it is very difficult to come to a correct conclusion as to how many locusts were destroyed by each Minister. Until 1924 the locusts were constantly increasing so that the whole of the Transvaal was covered, and that was also the case with a great part of the Free State and the Cape Province. One can therefore almost say that there were locusts over two-thirds of the Union. The swarms consequently became so large that I think there was only one swarm in each province. If one takes the numerical strength of the locusts, you will find that the present Minister of Agriculture has killed by far the greatest number of locusts. I think the hon. member will agree with me that that is the case. Then there is another point I want to bring to the Minister’s notice. The caterpillars in mealies have been mentioned and of course the Minister is aware that the caterpillars did much damage during the past year throughout the whole of the Union. I hope the Minister will be able to tell us to-night what research work has been done by the entomology division of the department in connection with combating this plague. We know that there are two enemies of every insect, and it will be interesting to know what research work has been done about the natural enemy of the caterpillars and in connection with their artificial eradication. I mention this because I see that in Hawaai where the sugar cane industry some years ago was in danger of being destroyed by caterpillars, they have been looking for the natural enemy of the caterpillars. After some years the natural enemy was found and it had scarcely been imported into Hawaai a year when the whole plague of sugar cane caterpillars was eradicated. What is very interesting is the fact that this natural enemy is not dangerous. He only lives on the caterpillars and as these become less their enemy also becomes less, while the latter increase when the caterpillars increase. In this way he is a continuing enemy and eradicates the caterpillars. I shall be very glad if the entomology department will pay attention to this and find out how not only the mealie caterpillars, but also others can be eradicated by their natural enemy. There is another thing I want to mention, about something that came to my notice because my constituency is on the border. Importation of cattle from Rhodesia is being systematically carried out for marketing in the Union. Perhaps the matter has already come before the Minister and he will be able to tell us what preventives he has taken to stop it. I understand that the cattle are brought across the boundary on foot and then kept on certain farms until in one way or another a permit is obtained to remove them to the market. Another thing I want to bring to the notice of the Minister is the fact that the district of Marico last year suffered badly as a result of the condemnation of export oranges. The Minister knows that the orange farmers there, almost without exception, had to pay in on account of the export oranges they sent away.

What was the reason of that?

The reason was for the most part the strike, but there are of course other reasons as well. The grievance that is felt there is that there were Government inspectors to pass the oranges, but the same oranges were rejected by the inspectors at the coast. We want the Minister of Agriculture to assist us with the Minister of Railways and Harbours to get some of the railway rates written off. One finds that the railway rates for export oranges are much less than for oranges intended for the Cape Town market. The rate is 8½d. for export oranges, but 2s. 1d. for oranges intended for the local market. It therefore happens that when the farmers send their oranges for export and they are rejected for some reason, and put on the local market, then the farmers lose very much, because then they do not have to pay 8½d. but 2s. 1d. for railway charges. Consequently the farmers always have to pay in for railway freight. I understand that the lower charge cannot be made so as not to interfere with the citrus growers of the Cape Province: What, however, happened last year was an exceptional case, and I hope the Minister of Agriculture will assist us in getting the railway department to write it off. Then there is also great distress in the Western Transvaal this year. It is in certain parts and there are farmers who for the last three or four years have suffered from locusts and drought, especially where there are wheat farmers and the people had hail, and unfortunately this year they have drought again. Consequently there is almost nothing for the people in those parts to live on. I shall be glad if the Minister will assist the people there by bringing the serious state of affairs to the notice of the Government because help is necessary there and very soon. I shall be glad if the Minister will use his influence to have steps taken to assist the people so as to put them on their feet again. I mention this because the methods employed, viz.: that work is only given to necessitous people are not the best methods for farm owners, whether they own the farms or not. I think we should have precautionary measures or machinery to establish them so that the man who occupies ground shall not have to leave the ground.

I addressed the Minister earlier in the session on the question of the scab position in Natal, my object being to show that his simultaneous dipping policy had proved a comparative failure in Natal. I was fortified by figures which he supplied to me in answer to a question which I tabled earlier in the session, and which showed, as far as my own district is concerned, that on September 1st, 1924, six flocks of sheep were reported as infected and on September 1st, 1925, 38 flocks of sheep were reported as infected, or 32 more infected flocks after his simultaneous dipping than before it. I tried to give to the Minister what appeared to me good reasons why his simultaneous dipping policy had failed in Natal. I told him that he had to look for the source of infection in the native locations, Crown lands and mission reserves, and that I felt quite sure that natives before producing their sheep at a given place for inspection concealed any that showed visible infection, and in those circumstances it was futile carrying out simultaneous dipping. The Minister in reply made a statement which was resented very much by the farmers in Natal. He said—

I would remind the Minister again that there are no farmers on the Crown lands, in the native locations and I don’t think there are any in the mission reserves, so that his assertion that the farmers are to blame is unfair and unwarrantable. The farmers have no control over the areas in question. There are a number of farmers who are resident in the Free State and who own winter grazing farms in Natal, and if the Minister wants to blame farmers for negligence in regard to scab—well, I say they are the people to blame, because they are absentees in the summer months whose farms are left in charge of a bywoner or possibly a native. The genuine Natal farmer is not to blame in the slightest degree for this unsatisfactory position in regard to scab. I have asked the Minister to concentrate his energies on those native areas. In my own constituency it is a question if the inspectors who are employed to control scab are adequate, having regard to the enormous areas occupied by natives. In the. Bergville Division which is in my constituency there is scheduled under the Natives Land Act, 239,700 acres as native areas and in the Helpmakaar and Impofana districts part of which are in my constituency, 268,988 acres are scheduled as Native Areas, and I venture to assert that 75 per cent, of the native kraal heads in those areas own sheep. The statement that I made earlier in the session was based upon my own personal observation as my own farms are in the neighbourhood of native areas. Since then a letter has been addressed to the Minister from the secretary of the Dundee and Helpmakaar District Farmers’ Union in which he says in reference to the speech I made earlier in the session—

The Minister will remember that I suggested to him that he should provide one or two smart boys to go round with the inspectors and while the inspector was carrying out his inspection, these boys should round up any sheep that may have been concealed. I am glad that the suggestion I then made has been concurred in by the farmers It is all very well for hon. members on the other side to taunt Natal with having scab and not being able to eradicate it but they should remember that 25 per cent of the land in Natal is native area and the question of eradicating scab is, therefore, a much more difficult problem there than in the Free State where there are practically no native areas. My opinion as to the source of infection has been verified by farmers throughout my own district who agreed that I had put my finger on the weak spot. If the Minister would concentrate on the native locations, Crown Lands and other native areas, scab would soon become a thing of the past in Natal. [Time limit.]

This debate has been dragging on for quite a long time and: I wish to reply to several matters raised by hon. members on the other side. I might point out to the hon. member for Klip River (Mr. Anderson) that the native locations in Natal have already been isolated and simultaneous dipping is going on in these locations and the native constables asked for are being appointed to assist in getting the sheep out of places where they should not be. If I get the help of the farmers in Natal, I am certain I will succeed as well there as in the Free State, the Transvaal and the Cape to stamp out scab. The hon. member for Swellendam (Mr. Buirski) and also the hon. member for Stellenbosch (Mr. J. P. Louw) have again raised the question of guano. They cannot quarrel with me because there is not enough guano. They ought to quarrel with the poor birds. They also quarrel with me about the price of guano. According to an analysis made, guano compares about £15 a ton to the other stuff we are using of about £5 a ton. It is stated that the State is making a profit, but there is a loss one year and a profit another and for this reason we do not contemplate reducing the guano at present. If the price of guano is reduced more than at present the Cape farmers will get less than at present because the Transvaal, Free State and Natal will come in for it. In regard to the question of locusts, which has again been raised by the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick), there might be a considerable difference in the size of the swarms and therefore it might have cost more to destroy the same number of locust swarms. Then I would point out to him that the officials of the Economics and Markets Department have a great deal of work to do. For instance, they have to see what the production of maize is, what it costs the farmer to produce, and they have to do the same with meat, cattle, sheep and in every way they have to find out whether the farmer is farming in the right way to give him a profit and have to give the farmers advice in that direction. If the hon. member will inquire he will find that market reports for every division of the country are being sent to every post office in the Union. The hon. member wants me to build silos and plant grasses on several of the farms. Surely he does not expect me to do these things. It is for the farmers to do these things themselves. The hon. member for Cape Town (Harbour (Maj. G. B. van Zyl) has been accusing the department of not publishing the figures of their egg-laying competitions. That hon. gentleman is such a goad farmer that I would refer him to the Agricultural Journal of June, 1924. On page 565 he will get all the information he is asking for. If he will read the reports of the department he will not accuse the department of not issuing these reports. The hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) has brought up the question of an experimental farm. The Minister of Lands has already communicated with me on that subject, but I am afraid all the districts are asking for an experimental farm. I hope when the Minister of Finance asks hon. members to pay a little more for this kindness to the country they will get everything they want, but it is impossible under present circumstances to give them everything they want.

The sugar industry at present pay for their own experimental station.

In America now they are not going in for experimental farms but for experimental plots. I think I have told the hon. gentleman already that I am prepared to give them an experimental plot in Zululand. They have one already. The hon. member for Illovo, who is not here, is very much interested in Mr. Schlesinger’s movements ; but he had better inquire of Mr. Schlesinger himself. I am not very much concerned about the gentleman and I am not going to worry about that. The hon. member for Hospital (Mr. Papenfus) asked me about reducing the fees for milk records. I am considering that question. We are busy just now with Parliament, but as soon as Parliament is adjourned I will see what can be done in that direction. The hon. member has also brought up the question of plantations and machinery, but that is a matter which comes under the Factory Act, and will no doubt be dealt with by my colleague, the Minister of Labour. The hon. member for Kingwilliams-town (Maj. Ballantine) also wanted an experimental farm. I can say the same to him as I said to other members—it is impossible to give him one, but if circumstances allow I will grant an experimental plot. The hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.-Gen. Byron) raised the question of a veterinary surgeon there. A principal veterinary surgeon is stationed at Kingwilliamstown, and East London is not very far off. It is impossible to give a veterinary surgeon to each district. Hon. members are always complaining about the Estimates going up, but how can we keep expenses down if they are always asking for these things ? With regard to jointed cactus, I have already given an explanation this afternoon. Certain experiments have been made which are successful, and I am now communicating with the provincial authorities, under whom jointed cactus comes, and they will deal further with that matter. As to certain grasses to which the hon. member referred, experiments have been made, and they say that if at certain times the grass is burned down it: kills those grasses. I have sent the information to the Native Affairs Department, and they will make propaganda further in that direction.

†*The hon. member for Bechuanaland asked, in connection with the farm Armoedsvlakte, if we could not keep a better class of rattle on the farm. The farm was originally intended for enquiry in connection with Gallamsiekte, but that no longer prevails. Of course, it will cost much money if we stock a good class of cattle there. Stables will have to be built, and fodder will have to be carried for that purpose, because, as the name of the farm indicates, the grass there is poor. I will see if I can get the money from the Minister of Finance, but I do not know whether I shall succeed. The hon. member for Barberton (Mr. Rood) asked if there had not been negligence with regard to the grading of eggs. The matter was investigated, and one of the members was discharged, but the Public Service Commission exonerated the official. The hon. member for Witbank (Mr. A. I. E. de Villiers) asked what damages we had to pay to farmers who suffered losses in consequence of simultaneous dipping. The agitation in connection with that lasted for months. The total amount paid was £877 0s. 1d., of which half is still to be paid by the Nicotine Dip Factory, so that the State has suffered a loss of £438 10s. We had all the fuss of hon. members opposite last year about it. In connection with the success of simultaneous dipping, I do not think hon. members will complain any more about the “terrible” damage which was suffered. The hon. member for Ceres (Mr. Roux) asked a question in connection with the fencing of outspans. That comes under divisional councils, and if they do not wish to pay their part when the public are good enough to pay theirs, it can hardly be expected that the Central Government should pay it. If we get the farms back so that the Minister of Lands can allot them to farmers, I think we shall very quickly settle the question. With regard to the caterpillar plague, I want to say that my department is making investigations, and in, time, when we have more knowledge of the conditions, we shall possibly be able to do something. The hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. G. van Heerden) was, as the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) said, apparently under an entirely wrong impression that farmers had to pay for the expert advice in the matter of rams. Payment actually had to be made, as the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet said, but I then strongly represented to the Government, and the Minister of Finance subsequently agreed to make the expert advice gratis. Then the hon. member for Witwatersberg (Lt.-Col. N. J. Pretorius) spoke about the officials for winter sowing and summer sowing. I may tell the hon. members that there is to be an experimental farm in Malmesbury for winter crops, and another in the Free State for summer crops. Does the hon. member want us to transfer officials from here to the Free State, and from there to here ? I do not know whether the hon. member wants that, but we cannot have one official to do the work on two experimental farms. Then the hon. member for Bethal (Lt.-Col. H. S. Grobler) asked me if we were going to prohibit the export of mealies this year. Where he got that idea from, I do not know. The Government does not intend to follow the policy of the South African party Government. We are not going to prohibit mealie farmers from getting a good price for their mealies, and will permit them to sell their mealies at the best price obtainable. Then the question of the carriage of fertilizers was mentioned. The Minister of Railways and Harbours told me that the rate was as low as possible. The hon. member for Oudtshoorn (Mr. le Roux) spoke about the necessity of a tobacco experimental station at Oudtshoorn. There is a tobacco expert at Oudtshoorn to-day, and I do not think that the department is able to establish a tobacco experimental station there. I hope that after the information I have given, the House will be prepared to pass my vote.

I just want to draw the Minister’s attention to a question which I raised on the 2nd February last, with regard to insect pests and the protection of wild birds. I asked the Minister whether he could give interested persons a list of the names and description of wild birds which were indispensable aids to agricultural production in reducing insect pests, and the Minister replied “Yes.” On February 16th I asked whether the Minister would publish the list, but received no reply until February 23rd, the answer being that the names and descriptions of the birds would be produced in book form as early as possible. He, on the 23rd March last, laid on the Table two volumes issued by Mr. Fitz-Simons—very invaluable books—but the purport of my question was whether his department could furnish agriculturists or intending settlers with a list of these birds. To table two months after his reply Mr. FitzSimons’ work is hardly in accord with the reply given to my questions first mentioned. The Minister’s reply clearly states that his department could furnish such lists and descriptions, not that they were to be found in Mr. FitzSimons’ work. The reply was and is misleading. I know the Minister is a convert to the wild bird protection movement, because when representations were made to him from the Northern Transvaal regarding the economic value of guinea fowl, he asked the Administrator of the Transvaal to have the birds protected. According to the statements by the Minister, 11,500 wild birds were exported from South Africa last year. These birds are a great asset to the country, which cannot afford to allow such a large number to be exported. The Minister, during the Wild Bird Protection Bill debate, promised to take steps to see that the value of wild birds was brought home to the school children. I wish to remind him of this promise, and to urge its fulfilment.

I will just answer the hon. member. He said I had made him wait for an answer to his question about the various kinds of insect-destroying birds. He knows I have no knowledge of all the birds, and have not made a study of them, and therefore I have first to look for information. I have already given all the information, and it was in book form. I shall recommend the hon. member to read the book, and then he will learn what kind of birds they are.

I have read it, but you have not.

Nor am I going to. The hon. member also mentioned that many birds are exported. I have made enquiry, and found out that finches and sparrows are, e.g., exported. The export of two kinds is not recommended by the experts, but where they recommend it, there is no objection.

Who is responsible for the issue of regulations dealing with the introduction of cattle into the Transkei—the department of agriculture or the department of native affairs? Is the Minister going to extend the same privilege to sheep inspectors in the Transkei as are enjoyed by sheep inspectors in Natal, who have a native constable to aid them in their investigations?

That is a question for the department of native affairs.

Amendment proposed by Maj. Richards put and negatived.

Vote, as printed, put and agreed to.

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

House Resumed :

Progress reported ; House to resume in committee to-morrow.