I would like to say a few words on the income tax.

Perhaps the hon. member will reserve his remarks until the Minister of Finance moves that the report be adopted.

I move—

seconded.

I want to say a few words on behalf of a class which is not very often defended in this House. The other day, in discussing this matter of Ways and Means, the hon. member for Troyeville (Mr. Kentridge), I think it was, suggested that it would be a good thing to increase the exemptions to the lower incomes, and steepen up the rates to the higher incomes. I would like to say a few words on behalf of that class of the community who pay on the higher incomes. People of this class pay in this country income tax at the rate of 7s. in the £, i.e., 2s. normal tax, and 5s. super tax. To my mind, in a new country awaiting development and wanting capital on every side, it is an absurd tax. All this comes directly out of the pockets of the people. It is generally supposed that when a man is taxed to the extent of 7s. in the £ that that reduces his power of spending on luxuries and things of that kind, on his enjoyment, let us say. It does not do that to anything like the extent popularly supposed. Such a man has an income of £24,000 a year. There are very few people in this country who could spend that if they wished to, and they do not do so. They spend a portion of it, I daresay, but the biggest part is spent on new enterprises or extending enterprises or on new works of some kind, or it may even be deposited at the bank. The tax itself does not make much difference as regards his spending the money on himself or his family. He will spend the same amount on himself in any case, but what will go short owing to the tax is saving and investment in new enterprises. He will spend less on capital purposes. The people, consequently, who really suffer are the working people of this country, because as there is less capital there is less demand for labour. You have to-day, consequently, a lot of unemployment in this country, notwithstanding the efforts of the Government, and they have made extensive efforts, and they have also given employment in public works and the like. But the Government cannot employ all the people in this country by a long way. We see it in this city. There is a large number of unemployed in Cape Town at the present moment. Undoubtedly one reason for the unemployment in the Union is the heavy taxation this country has to pay, £20,000,000 is taken out of the pockets of the people every year. Supposing you only took half that, say, £10 000,000. I have no hesitation in saying that of that £10,000,000, £5,000,000 would be used for saving and investment.

Tell us how you propose to save that £10,000,000.

I am on the taxation just now. I am putting up a point of view which is not put in this House, and I am also showing what the effects of taxation are. The Minister will agree with me that if taxation were cut down by half he would not have anything like the present unemployment.

I agree.

My hon. friend is in power and I am not. So it is not in my power to do it. £5,000,000 would be saved or spent in reproductive work of some kind, and there would then be an increased demand for labour. Even supposing it was all deposited in the bank, the bank would have to lend it out in order to get interest, and they would lend it to people who would make reproductive use of the money.

It is rather unusual on the motion for the adoption of the report to have a full discussion.

This has never been up before. Surely I am perfectly in order. I am only pointing out what the effects of the taxation are.

The hon. member can discuss the items before the House, but he is now addressing a general argument against taxation generally.

I am more particularly snowing how the man who pays a very heavy income tax of 7s., if he had to pay only half that amount would put the major portion of that half into reproductive work. It would have two effects; it would assist the development of the country very materially, and it would also find employment for a good number of additional workers in this country.

I should like to call attention to the unsatisfactory position in which the retail travellers’ licence stands at the present time. A traveller gets a licence from the Government for the sum of £7 10s., and he is free to go over the whole Union and solicit orders, even open a shop and occupy it for a day or a month or a year, and compete with local firms.

I think that could be more appropriately discussed on the second reading.

As licences are included in this report, I though I was quite in order.

I believe the hon. member is thinking of the hawkers’ licences. Other licences are not dealt with in this report.

I am not dealing with hawkers’ licences, but I will sit down if you tell me. I only want to point out that the retail traveller trades all over the Union and pays nothing more than £7 10s. per annum. The local authorities have no control over him at all. He even sells his goods to customers direct, thereby infringing the law, while storekeepers, who have rents and assistants to pay and who are liable to the ordinary municipal rates and other heavy expenses, are very heavily handicapped. I would like the Minister to look into this matter with the object of seeing first of all that these commercial travellers do not break the law. There ought to be a greater supervision over their activities, and in the second place there ought to be some control on the part of the municipal authorities. It is felt throughout the country in these small towns that undue competition is experienced by retail storekeepers.

The hon. member seems to be under the impression that we are discussing a Bill. It is not a Bill, and the remarks of the hon. member would be more appropriate on the second reading of the Bill.

I would like to point out that we are considering a report, but we have no report before us. Nothing has been circulated.

The report was put on the Table yesterday. The Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means brought up the report yesterday.

But that report has not been made available for members.

It is printed in the Votes and Proceedings, I understand.

There are definite decisions arrived at but no report is printed in the Votes and Proceedings at all. There is no report of that Committee in any document before us at all.

All the resolutions that were agreed to appear on page 641 of the Votes and Proceedings, and these resolutions are embodied in the report of the Chairman.

Of course this report refers only to increases of customs duty, but I understand that quite a good many alterations will be made. Will an opportunity be given when the Bill is brought forward to know what those are. The alterations are as important as the increases are. I would like to have the opportunity of discussing them as affecting Rhodesia.

I shall allow the hon. member to discuss that on the second reading of the Bill.

The Bill which will be brought up when this report is adopted will contain all the adjustments in the tariff—anomalies and so forth which have to be adjusted, and decreases, which are not dealt with in Committee of Ways and Means. In order to do that I moved a formal resolution, which the House adopted in Committee of Ways and Means. The question referred to by the hon. member for Dundee (Sir Thomas Watt) does not come up at all. We are not generally amending licence duties; this report deals only with hawkers. I know the difficulty to which the hon. member has drawn attention, and which was considered by the House when we passed the Licence Ordinance two years ago. Up-country storekeepers do not like the competition of travellers who solicit orders, but it was the general sense of the House that it would be unfair unduly to increase these licence fees to prohibit these people from carrying on their business. The Union Treasury had no interest in the amount payable by these people. The provinces will get the revenues. If the class of traders who is affected has strong feelings, and if they make representations, that is a matter we may consider later on. I do not want to go into the question raised by the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), beyond stating that it is our constant endeavour to have taxation as low as possible and to reduce it wherever possible. On the other point, that of steepening incidence of income tax, I have already informed the House what my view is. I have already said that our income tax rates at present are graduated on a fair scale, and do justice to all sections, and that it would not do by steepening the rates to try to get more from the rich people—call them that way—because unless you get your taxation spread over the mass of the people you will not get the revenue you want. That is the view I have expressed on a former occasion, and that is the view held by the country. The hon. member says that money would come into circulation if ten millions were saved. There I agree with him; the real point is— Can you save that ten millions?

The hon. member does not mean that to be taken literally.

Well, at any rate, he said we could save half the amount. The matter of reducing expenditure is one we are continually addressing ourselves to, but it is not so easy. The Government of which the hon. member was a member cut down expenses very drastically, and the right hon. member for Standerton (Gen. Smuts) said they had brought it down to the extent of nearly two millions. We have not since then unduly increased expenditure. We have gone in for new services, which I am quite sure not even hon. members opposite would want to eliminate or withdraw. Unless the country as a whole is prepared to make that sacrifice and reduce the expenditure considerably, it will not help us a bit, even if it is a good thing that money going into the exchequer should be available for general circulation.

Motion put and agreed to; committee appointed to bring up the necessary Bill or Bills.

I should like to bring a few points to the notice of the Minister. Last year the Minister visited the Grootfontein school and said that he thought that the agricultural colleges ought to be self-supporting. I should like to know from the Minister whether, when he used that argument he merely had in view the expenditure of the colleges in connection with the farming department of the school, or whether he was also thinking of the expenditure in connection with the lecturers, etc. Does he also think that the costs coming under the “extension” division where lecturers, e.g., go to the countryside and give lectures to the farmers should also be included therein. I raise the point because I should not like to see the agricultural school, because the expenditure is reduced, being hampered in their courses possibly in some way or another. I see that in connection with Grootfontein the Minister has put £30,000 on the Estimates as against £32,000 last year, or a reduction of £2,000. The Auditor-General in his report refers to the revenue from the produce and livestock which amounts to the sum of £10,000. The expenditure on the college is, however, £30,000 altogether. I should therefore like to know from the Minister what expense he was referring to when he made the remark and what direction the economy of £2,000 will take. I am thinking, e.g., of the sheep breeding course and the wool course at Grootfontein. I understand that that division to-day is practically one of the best in the world. That is not only the view of South Africans, but when the Empire Delegation was here the Australians said the same thing. It would therefore be a pity for such a course to be hampered in the zeal for retrenchment. Then I notice in the Auditor-General’s report that while the income of the Potchefstroom school is only £9,000, that at Grootfontein is £10,000, i.e., in relation to the sale of the produce and livestock of the farms. I should like to know from the Minister why the income at Potchefstroom is so much less seeing that Glen college is practically the largest college in the country. Another point I want to raise is in connection with the labour used on the farm. I should think that it would be a very good thing if the Minister were to use a class of labourer on the farm who can be trained in farm work. We still have many poor whites to-day in the country, and if we could take some of the poor people from the surrounding district to do the work on the farms, then those persons after they have been working for some time at such an institution could get a certificate and then undoubtedly be much more fitted for agricultural work. I am very glad that the Minister of Labour is also listening to this suggestion. Thoroughbred cattle are kept on the farms where the colleges are, and if the people there learn how to treat them they will after they have had the experience be in a much better position than before to earn more money than the man who has absolutely no knowledge. The difficulty is just to find people who can do that sort of work. Many of the farmers who are progressive and keep thoroughbred cattle cannot obtain that class of man, but if, as I suggest, the people are trained then they would be able to do the work for the farmers. It is very difficult for the farmers to pay people who know nothing and yet look for work, more than the ordinary labourer, but if they have acquired a little knowledge at the agricultural colleges then they will be worth more and their position will be improved. Then there is another point that I am not anxious to deal with, but about which many of my constituents feel strongly. I want to ask the Minister to be careful with regard to the people he appoints as house fathers at the colleges. I asked the Minister a question some time ago in connection with the appointment of the house father at Grootfontein. I feel that there is unrest and dissatisfaction amongst the parents, and I want to ask the Minister to be very careful in the appointment of house fathers, because he knows that they have a fairly large responsibility. I merely mention in passing the case of Mr. Anderson.

I would like the Minister to give the committee some information regarding the question of bilingualism in the various agricultural colleges I understand that half the lectures and other teaching work at these colleges, with the exception of the one in Natal, is in English and the other half in Afrikaans. That is quite right. We are a bilingual country and public money should be spent equally for both English-speaking and Dutch-speaking people, but I want to put in a word regarding the Cedara College, which is in Natal, where a knowledge of Dutch is not nearly so general as it is in other parts of South Africa. I hope the present system of delivering all the lectures in English at Cedara will be continued for some time. Natal will in course of time become a thoroughly bilingual country and I hope that day will soon arrive but at the present time, youngsters who I know are anxious to qualify at these schools find themselves handicapped. In addition they are doing their best in the High Commissioner’s office to attract the right class of settler to go on to the land in this country. These English-speaking youngsters who never saw South Africa before cannot expect to receive benefit if they attend lectures in the Dutch language. I hope the Minister will continue to see that all the lectures and instructions at Cedara are in future given in English. I have distant relatives of mine who have gone through the course at Cedara and benefited by it, and they have been advised to go on to Grootfontein, but they hesitated, because they did not understand Dutch. I say nothing against continuing the use of the two languages in all the other colleges, but taking into account the larger number of British born young fellows who are coming into the country and who are advised by the High Commissioner’s office to undergo a course of training at agricultural colleges, it is necessary they should be instructed in a language they understand. The Minister told me that for the time being there is no intention to make biligualism compulsory at Cedara, and I hope he will not do so in the immediate future. Time will bring about the knowledge of the other language in Natal, and I long to see that day, but in the interests of the present generation, and these young fellows who are coming here with the intention of settling, it is necessary that instruction at Cedara, one school out of five should, be in English alone. I hope the Minister will take these remarks in the spirit I have made them and tell us what are his intentions for the future.

A few years ago it was a habit with some hon. members, e.g the hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.-Gen’ Byron) to attack agricultural schools because they said there were almost as many teachers as pupils. I felt aggrieved when they made the attack because they wanted to make out that there was a superfluous staff, that the State could manage with many less and that the institutions were top heavy. I think that the wisdom of the Ministers of. Agriculture of both Governments has now been fairly well established in having allowed the agricultural schools to go on in that way. We know that the work of the teachers is not only to lecture to the students but they have also to perform a number of other duties. The Glen agricultural school near Bloemfontein was attacked often and I want to point out to-day how that agricultural school has progressed. A few years ago there were only 20 students, and just as many teachers, but on the 1st of April of this year there were no less than 99 diploma-students and a staff of only 29. If we compare the number of students in the other agricultural schools we find that at Grootfontein there are 52 students, at Potchefstroom, 43, and Elsenburg 39, and at Cedara 37 students. Hon. members will therefore see that the Free State agricultural school has made tremendous progress. In addition it may be mentioned that last year no less than 1,000 applications were received to attend the short courses. This is a record for any agricultural school in South Africa. Owing to the lack of facilities, however, only 446 of the applications to attend short courses could be granted. This year the position was such that applications to join the diploma courses also had to be rejected, because there was not sufficient room for all the students in the Free State. We welcome the fact of such a large demand, and I want to heartily thank the Minister of Agriculture for what he has done for the Free State agricultural school. When the present Government came into office there were many things that were not right, though I do not say that the former Minister of Agriculture did not do good work. The present Minister, however, has rectified quite a number of things and treated the agricultural school very sympathetically, with the result that the progress was so great that students had to be refused admission. I want to ask the Minister to assist the agricultural school in future as in the past so that it can take all the students who apply. In past years there was considerable prejudice against agricultural schools. I was myself for two years a visiting lecturer at Glen and I know what went one and that among the public there was a prejudice against agricultural schools. Such a change, however, was made in the method of education that the agricultural schools are today becoming full. I hope the Minister of Agriculture will assist us in order that sufficient accommodation may be supplied for the students from the Free State and so prevent their applications being rejected. I want to quote a few figures to show what is being done, by the agricultural schools, for the Free State. During last year, e.g., there were no less than 264 lectures and demonstrations attended by 13,000 people. No less than 21,000 sheep were classified, while 13,500 poultry were classified. This shows what work an agricultural school does for the public. From the applications to attend the short courses we see how the farmers on the countryside appreciate the work of the agricultural school because they are all anxious to make use of the facilities there given. It is only a pity that there is not enough accommodation to receive everybody and I hope that the department will even yet supply the accommodation. I want to support what was said by the hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G, C. van Heerden) in connection with labour at the agricultural schools. I hope that it will be the Government’s, policy not to employ the old people but young fellows as farm labourers. Everywhere that I go amongst the farmers I find that there is a great lack of young fellows who know anything about farming to go and work on the farms. The farmers do not like to have old people of the bywoner type but are constantly asking where they can get young men. The Minister knows that at Tweespruit there is an opportunity for such training, and that the head of the institution cannot keep ahead of the farmers, in the supply of this kind of labour. I am also glad to see that the agricultural schools, especially Glen, are making use of the opportunity of placing many students on farms during the vacations. I know many students who during the vacation prune trees and classify sheep and wool. I hope that this practice will be encouraged at all the agricultural schools because some of the students are not farmers’ sons and do not know much of farming. They will get practical experience if during the vacations they go and work on the farms. I also want to ask the Minister if something cannot be done at Glen in the direction of wheat growing, and if not at Glen then somewhere in the Free State. I think an attempt is being made to establish such an experimental station for wheat growing at Clocolan. The farmers require advice to assist them in commencing wheat growing in the Free State and to put it on a proper footing. I hope the matter will be fully gone into to assist the eastern portion of the Free State in this connection because enough wheat cap be produced there to supply the Union. I hope the Minister will assist the Free State and will see that the farmers are given the necessary advice. Another matter in connection with the Glen agricultural school is that various attempts are being made to obtain some sort of co-operation between the agricultural school and the Grey University College in Bloemfontein. The Minister knows that representations were made to him and that we in the Free State feel that there ought to be greater facilities for higher agricultural education. When a Free State boy wants to receive higher agricultural training he must go to the other provinces where farming conditions are not the same as in the Free State. I hope the Minister will assist us in getting co-operation between the two institutions named so that facilities will be given at Glen to students of the university college to get the practical part of their training at Glen.

Under the heading “agricultural bursaries” I notice that there is £6,355 available for the purpose, and I should like the Minister to inform me whether the amount is exclusively intended for bursaries oversea and whether bursaries in South Africa are also paid out of it. In connection with the conditions connected with the oversea bursaries I notice that the Auditor-General made the remark that a student who had received a bursary only worked for 3½ months and was then discharged. His studies, however, cost the country £762. I understand that the reason why he was no longer employed was that he was not bilingual, and that consequently he could not comply with the service regulations. If a condition of the granting of a bursary is that the holder thereof should on his return go into the public service, then I want to ask whether it would not be wise only to give bursaries for oversea studies to bilingual students. It is not a matter of partiality with me, but I want the State to get its just benefit from the money which is spent on oversea bursaries. Another important point is that £1,400 was provided in the Estimates last year for the agricultural training to ladies. The amount, however, does not appear in the Estimates this year. I think it is particularly important to our country that women should receive agricultural instruction according to their powers so that they can become fitted for farm life.

The universities now provide for that.

If the amount is included in the grants to the universities I am satisfied. It was a healthy sign that last year 20 ladies studied agriculture and I do not want an end to be put to that. With a view to the amalgamation of the agriculture faculty of the University of Stellenbosch and the Agricultural School at Elsenburg, I want to ask the Minister a question not with the object of arousing suspicion but to get information. The expenditure on two institutions before the amalgamation last year was £44,447, viz., £14,725 for Stellenbosch, and £29,722 for Elsenburg. From the nature of things one would expect that an amalgamation of two separate institutions should effect economy but instead of that the agricultural college Stellenbosch-Elsenburg this year is costing £52,209. I am not finding fault with this but we should like to know what has caused the increase. It must be a very good reason probably because the number of students has increased. I calculate the cost per student at less than during the previous year. The average cost per student at Eisenberg was £300 last year while this year it is £150 for the joint institution. The total amount is nevertheless more and we should like to have the necessary information about it.

I would like to call the Minister’s attention to one point in connection with the students at the different agricultural colleges. About two months ago I advertised in the “Farmers’ Weekly” for a young fellow or somebody to look after my farm, and as an inducement I stated that I would be prepared to stock the farm so as to give some young fellow a start. Strangely enough I did not get a single reply from any of the students at the agricultural colleges. I notice from the estimates that these colleges cost £194,000, less £50,000 departmental receipts. I also see that the number of students for diploma and faculty is 450. It must follow, therefore, that a good many students pass out from the colleges every year and yet when I put an advertisement in the “Farmers’ Weekly” for somebody which would have been, you would think, an extraordinarily good chance for some of our young fellows to take up, I did not receive a single reply. The students themselves can hardly be to blame, because I take it to be the duty of the principals to look out for such advertisements in the papers and bring them under the notice of their pupils. The principals at least might take up a matter of this kind and tell any promising pupils that here was a vacancy that might provide them with a good post for their future career. It seems to me there must be something amiss with our agricultural colleges when an incident of this kind can occur. I think that if the Minister would instruct the principals of the colleges to take notice of such advertisements as appear to be suitable for their students he would be doing a great deal of good for some of the students.

I have a few more points which I want to bring to the Minister’s notice. The hon. member for Ladybrand (Mr. Swart) spoke about dissatisfaction amongst the staff of the colleges. As far as I know they work fairly hard and are very busy. When they are not engaged at the college they are employed giving lectures on the countryside, and assisting the farmers with advice. They do excellent work, especially in connection with sheep breeding and the handling of wool, and we ought to appreciate their services. The progress which has taken place with reference to wool and stock is tremendous. It is to a great extent due to the excellent work of the experts and their advisers. The difference from five or six years ago will be immediately noticed at stock sales, and the specimen of stock has undoubtedly much improved. I want to say a few more words in connection with the appointment of house fathers. I do not wish to do so in a spirit of scandalizing, but in the interest of the colleges. The Minister knows that Mr. Anderson was only house father at Grootfontein for a short time, and it is said he was guilty of improper conduct. The parents are very unhappy about the occurrence and that person is to-day house father at Potchefstroom. I should be glad if the Minister will go further into the matter and see whether the complaint against Mr. Anderson rests on good ground. I hope then that the Minister will see that such a thing does not occur again. It undoubtedly gives a bad name to the colleges.

The hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. C. van Heerden) spoke about the Grootfontein house father who is now at Potchefstroom. Let me say at once that I received no complaint against Mr. Anderson. After the hon. member had put a question to me I had an enquiry made and the person with whom Mr. Anderson had had words said that he was not going to make any further complaint because it was a private matter which had been settled between them. Let me say that I have known Mr. Anderson for many years. He was for years a deacon in the Dutch Reformed Church at Piet Retief, and as far as I know him and his wife they are dear and exemplary people. I am therefore astonished at the accusation of bad conduct. I hope the hon. member will be able to repeat it outside the House so that Mr. Anderson will have a chance of dealing with the accusation. One cannot guarantee another but as far as I know him he is a very good man and a very good South African. The hon. member for Potchefstroom (the Rev. Mr. Fick) was recently in his constituency and he would surely have brought it to my notice if there was anything wrong. Mr. Parish, head of the school, who is of English-speaking descent, but was the first who introduced complete bilingualism at the agricultural schools at Glen and Potchefstroom would surely have brought anything of the sort to my notice.

May I just explain that they are complaints from some of my constituents, and that I understand that a charge was laid.

That is not so. The matter between Mr. Anderson and the other person was privately settled.

I accept the statement of the Minister.

Now the hon. member said that I had stated that the agricultural colleges should be self-supporting. Let me say at once that I expect the revenue from the schools should be such that the expenses of the schools excluding research work, should be more or less covered out of revenue. Then the hon. member asked why the income at Potchefstroom was smaller than that at Grootfontein. In reply to that I must at once point out the different methods of farming. We are encouraging sheep farming, and as the hon. member knows the principal receipts at Grootfontein are from sheep. It is a large farm with a large number of sheep. At Potchefstroom, on the other hand, more sowing is done, and from that the income is less. The grain farmers have a worse time. Then white labour has been mentioned. We are encouraging it as much as possible, but there are certain cases where it is not possible. Take, e.g. shepherds and leaders. We must not go too fast in this direction because we should have to erect new buildings for white labour which would cost thousands of pounds. Is Parliament prepared to vote the money? Constant demands for extra things are made, but on the other hand we always hear that money is being recklessly spent. We do our best to use white boys as much as possible. With regard to the appointment of house fathers I have already replied. We hope the new house father at Grootfontein will give every satisfaction. I do not know him personally but have met him and he has very good testimonials. The hon. member for Ladybrand (Mr. Swart) spoke about wheat growing. We are encouraging it very much, and are making experiments, and we shall see what can be done in the Free State by means of experimental plots. I want, however, to point out that rye grows very quickly in our country. Our people eat a great deal of fine white bread which according to the doctors is not so good for the digestion. If our people ate more brown bread then we should not need to import flour because our country is excellently suited for growing rye. The hon. member further asked if it was not possible to bring about co-operation between the Grey College and the Glen College. We have just made the experiment of amalgamating Stellenbosch and Elsenburg. So far it is doing well, but we want to wait and see how it will continue. I know that in Bloemfontein many people are keen on the co-operation, but it will cost a further and a considerable sum of money and we should like first of all to see how the change with regard to Elsenburg works out. Then we can consider the Free State case. The students of Grey College can, however, take the agricultural course at Glen. As regards stock farming, the Government has decided to buy another farm for the Glen College, and to keep more stock there.

Will provision also be made for more accommodation?

We shall do our best. The hon. member for Hopetown (Dr. Stals) asked a few questions about bursaries. I just want to point out that all the bursaries are not for study oversea. The hon. member will see that there are twelve for veterinary purposes in Pretoria amounting to £600, while in addition under the Free State law certain interest is available annually on money taken over from the old Government out of which three bursaries of £600 are made available. Furthermore £3,700 is given by the Union and that is for bursaries oversea. In conclusion £1,000 is given to the agricultural school for cases of poor children. Then the hon. member spoke about the increased expenditure on the agricultural college Stellenbosch-Elsenburg. The extension work is also now being done by the faculty, and a larger staff is therefore necessary. Then this year an amount had to be paid which formerly came out of tire funds of the college but is now paid by the department.

†The hon. member for Dundee (Sir Thomas Watt) has brought up the question of the languages in the agricultural schools. I may say that at Potchefstroom, Grootfontein, Glen and Elsenburg we are teaching both languages, English as well as Dutch. As far as Cedara is concerned I had the chiefs of the department, together with the principal of the school, at Pretoria, and it was decided that taking into consideration the position of Natal they should go on as usual until 1929 when we would gradually introduce more of the second language. We are trying also there to give lectures in certain subjects in Afrikaans as far as they can follow, and gradually we hope that Natal will be in the position of being fully bilingual, the same as in the other districts.

You are looking too far ahead. 1929 is a long way off.

The hon. member for Dundee, if I understood him correctly, said a lifetime. You don’t want a lifetime to learn a language. The hon. member for Parktown (Mr. Rockey) has raised the question that he inserted an advertisement and he expected that some of the boys at the agricultural schools would have applied but he did not receive a single application. I do not know what the hon. member wanted. That might be one difficulty. Another difficulty might be that all the boys educated there had already accepted appointments. I am glad the hon. member brought it to my notice. My department will get in touch and I will let the hon. member know what we find.

I want to bring to the Minister’s notice the transfer of the agricultural officer, Mr. Hofmeyr, who had done good work in my constituency, because the transfer has caused great dissatisfaction. I should further like to appeal to the Minister to erect a small experimental station in George because the people have not sufficient knowledge. The Minister knows that there are small farmers in the districts of Knysna and George who cannot make their own experiments, and because they are without the necessary experience many have gone so far as to completely ruin their ground by wrong fertilizer. Since Mr. Hofmeyr came there and commenced experimenting, conditions began to improve, but just as the farmers are commencing to reap the fruits of his services he is transferred to the Transvaal. The farmers feel that they are being neglected. In the whole of the southern Cape Province there is practically no official to-day who can give demonstrations or make experiments. Those parts are also very good for sheep, but there is not one wool expert from the Western Province right up to the south-western districts who can help the people to classify their sheep and wool. I want to urge the Minister to meet us and to establish an experimental station at George. The rainfall is good there and the station will be of great use.

The Minister laid down an axiom yesterday that unless objection is taken to a particular item—

Do not be childish.

It must be taken that the, House accepts it. I think that is sound common sense. For that very reason I am going to raise the matter of some new expenditure in the Minister’s vote.

What about hon. members who want more? Are you speaking on behalf of your party?

I understand that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance must have taken some notice of what I said yesterday, because they said I had referred to “trifling matters.” You cannot have it both ways. The axiom is either good, dealing with new votes, or it is bad. If it is good, it is the duty of every hon. member to seize upon new items and get some information from the Minister on that vote. I endeavoured yesterday, in my usual meek and mild way, to get some information on new items in the Minister’s vote, but he did not condescend to reply.

But you ran away. I am not going to reply if you do not sit it out.

He has got into bad, company. There is the warning—

Order. What item is the hon. member speaking on?

I am speaking, first of all generally, to show whether it is right or wrong for hon. members to draw attention to new items on the vote. Meantime I feel that if you were in my place I would take the opportunity of explaining. On page 146 we find under J.1, J.2, and J.3 items of new expenditure amounting to £3,030, for Malmesbury. It would be interesting if the Minister would tell us how many institutions of this kind are existing in South Africa, how many pupils there are, their total cost, the necessity for this new establishment, the success be expects, how many pupils there will be. If the hon. Minister condescends to answer these questions I have a few others to propound to him.

I am sorry that I have to refer to an item I spoke on last year; I refer to the labour account in connection with the agricultural schools’ expenses. I do not touch upon lecturers and officers directly concerned ill teaching, and I will not make much demur with regard to assistants, foremen, stockmen, and so forth; but I see there is £4,700 for labour with regard to Elsenburg. The point I wish to emphasize is that, to my mind, the amount for labour is excessive. If you turn to Grootfontein the amount is £3,850 and so it goes on in each of these five agricultural colleges. A great deal of this labour ought to be carried out by the students themselves, to a very large extent. Every student ought to do some of this rough labour if he is to become a practical farmer. I feel that these items show that the educational course for our boys at these colleges is not altogether based on the right lines. If it is necessary to spend such a huge sum of money there must be some return in production. It shows that the students are not being taught what is really the basis of all farming operations—economical working. Unless they are taught to work farming operations on an economical basis, there will be no profit in farming. I know a student who told me that at college they go early to the stables—not to clean them, but to look on at a kafir doing the job. I have a nephew at an agricultural college in England who had to do every bit of the course of farming operation month by month, and year by year in learning the theoretical work, and also the practical work. Here in this country, where there is a tendency to leave the work to the kafir, our colleges ought to insist on our boys doing that work if they intend to become farmers later on.

I want to ask the Minister if he could not give a little bit more attention to wheat growing. I understand that at Malmesbury you have inaugurated a very useful system where you are breeding different sorts of wheat and experimenting with wheat growing. You are doing your best to develop wheat growing in the Western Province, which we realize is the home of cereal culture Could the Minister not possibly divert a portion of this vote and start a branch of this Malmesbury cereal experimental farm on the high veld? In Canada the Government has taken a very great interest in wheat breeding experiments, and they have found that wheat which ripens ten days earlier has led to millions more acres coming under cultivation. The hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) (Mr. Barlow) mentioned that in the Orange Free State as much as seventeen bags to the acre had been reaped. That is a most extraordinary yield when we realize that in England and New Zealand, two countries where they have the biggest yields of wheat, the yield is 32 bushels or ten bags to the acre. One realizes the enormous possibilities of the high veld if there is such a yield in the Free State. Rust and many other factors, no doubt, present difficulties and retard wheat growing in the Orange Free State, Transvaal and these other high veld districts, but if experiments and proper investigations are carried out, it may be that the high veld would produce more wheat than the Western Province. We all agree with the necessity of producing our own foodstuffs. Another point which I raised before on this vote, and which I would like to raise again, and I hope effect will be given to it, is the training of a certain number of youths at some of the agricultural colleges in machine shearing. Thirty years ago 5s. per 100 was paid for sheep shearing, and now it is 10s., 15s. or 17s. 6d. per 100. It opens up very big openings to white youths, as it has done in Australia and other parts of the world. Everybody is keen to encourage this. I suggest that we take a certain number of youths and train them in shearing and the care and the use of the machines. If a small gang of shearers is organized there will be a great opening for the gradual employment of White men in sweep shearing. We are always talking of opening avenues of employment, and I see the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs has, an eye in this direction.

Very interesting.

In my district we will, if necessary, subscribe the money for the purchase of a shearing outfit if the Minister will organize the training of the boys. I believe the experiment can be made a success, but the Minister must give the boys a training through the agricultural colleges.

I support the suggestion made by the hon. member for Griqualand (Mr. Gilson). What is the Minister doing to maintain our cattle at a high standard by pure breeding? Recently I drew attention to the Minister’s embargo on the importation of purebred cattle from England, which was having a very detrimental effect on the raising of purebred stock in South Africa-. Fresh bulls are urgently required.

I don’t like to interfere with the hon. member, but the matter he is referring to does not appear on this Vote.

The point is that unless importation is again thrown open animals of the highest quality should be bred in the country at the schools of agriculture for distribution among cattle breeders. The reason we cannot import stock from England is that foot-and mouth disease is epidemic there, whereas we are allowed to import from Holland where the disease is endemic now. The increased grant proposed to be given to Elsenburg College, £9,000, requires some explanation. That is a tremendous increase, being 40 times the amount of the increased grant to Grootfontein, 13 times more than the grant to Cedara, 17 times in excess of that for Potchefstroom, and 15 times above that of Glen. If Elsenburg were doing 40 times as much good as Grootfontein, for instance, one could understand the increase. Why this tremendous difference? In Natal, we have only one agricultural college, Cedara, and for a long time there has been a lack of accommodation there. There is plenty’ of room for expansion if funds are provided. Feeding experiments should be continued for cattle and pigs.

We are still, carrying on those experiments.

I hope Government will continue the breeding of pedigree stock at the agricultural colleges, notwithstanding protests by certain people, but I notice with regret that there is a considerable reduction in the vote for purchasing stock for this purpose. I presume the reason is that the foot-and-mouth disease embargo has prevented the introduction of fresh blood.

No, that is not the reason. We cannot keep on buying.

Well, we should continue to buy fresh stock either from breeders in this country or abroad. The world’s experience is that it is necessary to introduce fresh blood from time to time if you are going to maintain a high standard. The stock at the various colleges is of this standard, and I hope the Government will continue to breed these animals, notwithstanding the outcry from certain quarters that by so doing the Government is competing with the private breeder. If we can get the country generally to realize the necessity of farmers improving their stock, the money will be very well spent. To touch on another point. I understand a reorganization is taking place of the veterinary department, and that some of the senior Government veterinary officers are to be pensioned before reaching the age limit; consequently there is a strong feeling of uncertainty and unrest amongst some of the veterinary staff. A certain number of senior veterinary officers are to be pensioned before reaching the regular age limit owing to this reorganization. I want to put in a word for the men who joined the veterinary service—especially in the Cape—before Union, on the distinct understanding that they would be retained in the service until they were 60 years of age, when they would by reason of that age and longer service, be entitled to a larger pension than if they left the service before attaining that age. If we are going prematurely to release veterinary officers on any scale, then it appears to be waste of money to vote veterinary bursaries for the purpose of training people to take the place of men who are retired before reaching the age limit. Are there 12 bursaries running concurrently, or is there a proportion of these granted annually for a period of years!

I think the Minister should ask for more money for the breeding of wheat. A certain amount of good work has been done in this direction in the Cape by Mr. Neethling, but the South African wheat leaves much to be desired. The great trouble in the Cape is rust. In Australia each state has a different type of wheat to suit the varying conditions of soil and climate. A variety of wheat has been found which not only eliminates rust, but produces from four to seven bushels per acre more than the ordinary type of wheat grown in the Cape.

You want us to compete with the breeder?

There is no private individual breeding wheat.

Is there not? Ask the hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat).

The fee of one guinea charged by the agricultural colleges for soil analysis is far too high. The charge should be a nominal one. There are many soils on a small patch of land of 100 acres. There may be three or four varieties and for each variety sent in for analysis the farmer is charged one guinea. He can’t afford that. It is for the general good of the country to have these sous properly analysed, so that the farmer will know what fertilizer to use.

Does the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) agree with that?

It is a matter for the country and I am surprised the hon. Minister is afraid of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central). I also hope the Minister has taken notice of the suggestion to teach our boys at the agricultural colleges sheep shearing. We may have to face a crisis in this country by having all the shearing done by natives.

Why don’t you do the same as with mealie growing and employ white people instead of natives?

I have only 700 acres of land under cultivation and the whole of it is ploughed by Europeans. It is very important that our lads should be taught to shear sheep because there may come a time when it will be necessary. On page 147 I see there is no vote this year for de-hydration, that is the drying of fruit by machinery. Under vote A (4) last year there was a sum of £753 for dehydration and investigation. If South Africa is to keep in the world’s markets with dried fruit we are not going to do it by sun drying because by that method it loses its colour and gets dirt in it. If it is done by machinery it is a better colour and is freer from dirt.

On a point of order are we discussing Vote No. 29 or 30, because what the hon. member is speaking about is under Vote 30.

No, it is not.

The hon. member may proceed.

I do not care what members on this side say about the de-hydration of fruit, but I say it is the proper method. I also see the Minister has reduced the votes on page 148 (b) 3 and 149 (c) 3, co-operative experiments with farmers. Why have these votes been reduced? Has it not been a success? In Natal it is eagerly sought after.

[Inaudible.]

I think the hon. member might address the Chair.

I am glad he has cut it down. This question of the cost of labour has been before the House for many years; to my knowledge for twelve years. I take it for granted it is native and coloured labour. At Elsenburg it is coloured: £4,700. If there is one place where you should employ white labour it is in these schools. The Minister of Labour has gone to sleep about this and nothing appears to be done.

It is being done.

You have had three years there and have done nothing.

You had twelve years and did nothing.

You have not delivered the goods notwithstanding your promises and this is a place where you can easily do it. I agree with the hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat) that the boys themselves should do some of it. You have it at Beginsel. For some years you had a lot of boys training at Groot Constantia. I have had four boys from there and I still have two and they are very satisfactory. For some reason or other it is closed now as a training institute. Why not use the boys who are sons of poor farmers, sons of bywoners. They would get billets outside as assistants to foremen when they are trained. I have been trying to get one lately as an assistant on a cattle farm but I cannot get one. If they turned out a fair number at Elsenburg and other farms they could get employment. This is an opportunity often brought before the House where the Government’s policy can be carried out on sound lines.

It will be.

I don’t mean adults. I want to start with the training of youths and boys. There may be a lot of opposition from the agricultural department; there must be opposition somewhere or it would have been done before. By this means you would get a lot of boys back on the farms with a knowledge of farming. I am perfectly certain it is a sound proposition.

I should like to support the request that the Minister should assist extending wheat growing in South Africa, because I think that hitherto we have not sufficiently realized what possibilities there are in South Africa. Steps can be taken in this direction by instructing one or other of the professors or lecturers at the agricultural schools to specially enquire into the question of rust-proof wheat. We know that Professor Neethling of the Agricultural College Stellenbosch-Elsenburg has already done useful work in this connection in the past, and that he has succeeded in growing a particularly suitable kind of rust-proof corn. I learn now, however, that he is not any longer confining himself to that and that there is no one at the agricultural school Stellenbosch-Elsenburg who takes particular interest in the work, and I should be glad if the Minister will give such a person the opportunity to give his entire attention to the growing of rust-proof wheat. To obtain the best results such a person must have the opportunity of making experiments in various parts of the country, and at the institution where he is employed he must be given more facilities. Good boxes are required for the experiments. [No quorum.] If proper experiments are made then South Africa will get into the same position that Australia is in to-day, in connection with kinds of wheat able to stand against rust. The successful growing of rust-proof wheat assures the Australian farmers to-day of their wheat harvests. Satisfactory experiments will give a tremendous fillip to our wheat growing so that it will be unnecessary to import from elsewhere. Then I want to ask the Minister if he will not instruct the agricultural college Stellenbosch-Elsenburg or the Grootfontein Agricultural School to get into closer touch with the districts of Ladismith, Calitzdorp and Oudtshoorn, where the people are taking up a different kind of farming from that hitherto followed. We know that the farmers have fortunately once and for all discovered that they must give attention to a different kind of farming than ostrich farming. An agronomist can be appointed from one of the institutions to institute a thorough enquiry into the kinds of soil so that the farmers can avail themselves of the best advice about the kinds of fruits or farming industries suited to their districts. The farmers are inclined to go in for fruit farming, especially for grapes, but they are not well informed, so that they will receive much benefit if my suggestion is adopted.

I should like to draw the Minister’s attention to the remarks of the Auditor-General with regard to the case of one of the overseas scholars referred to on page 259 of his report. The Auditor-General points out that a certain student—a South African—who was selected for an overseas scholarship, went to the United States of America and qualified there, but on his return the Minister found it impossible to agree to the employment of this young man as a lecturer, because he was not fully bilingual. I want to contrast the attitude of the Minister in this case with his action in appointing a unilingual cotton grader, selected in London, and introduced under a three years’ contract, which is also referred to in the Auditor-General’s report at page 250. In the one case this young South African had been chosen by the present principal of Grootfontein (Mr. Joubert), who has always been very mindful of the necessity for bilingualism on the part of his lecturers, but he chose this young man believing that he had a sufficient grounding in the language to be able on his return to gradually qualify, but he was not given any such opportunity. Mr. Joubert considered that in every other respect he was a very suitable lecturer and, out of a very large number of young men, he selected this one for study overseas. While there he qualified as a specialist in plant breeding, a line of work in which, I believe, our colleges are somewhat deficient at the present time, but, although he was highly qualified in that, and was also qualified in commercial art and design, another side which would have been very useful for demonstration purposes, the Minister declined to appoint him, and treated him on a basis of one month’s notice, although that young man went to America under an agreement which gave him a right to look to the Government on his return for five years’ employment. The Government had a right to demand five years’ employment from him, but that was treated by the Minister as a trilateral agreement, which only had force on one party. The result was that this young man, finding himself on a month’s agreement, decided to look round for other opportunities. He was offered appointments in Kenya and the United States, and he went to America, where he has done exceedingly well; America being very glad to have him, and he is there at the present moment drawing about £600 a year. The Minister’s excuse in this case was that the man was not fully bilingual, but in the same month he appointed a man who was confessedly unilingual. He appointed a man in England as a cotton grader, not nearly such a useful capacity as that of a plant-breeding specialist. He did this in the same month that he turned down a South African on the ground that he was not fully bilingual, although it was quite well known to the department that this young man had spent three and a half years in study in America to qualify in the particular branches for which he had been chosen to study in that country. That seems to me to savour of unfairness, and it certainly resulted in this young man leaving this country exceedingly embittered because of his treatment. I should like to refer to the remarks of the hon. member for Albany (Mr. Struben) with reference to bursaries at the veterinary faculty at Onderstepoort. I agree with the hon. member that it seems to be a futile proceeding to offer bursaries in the veterinary faculty when some of the best qualified men we have got in the profession to-day are being notified that their services may be terminated long before the period in which they are due to retire under the law under which they joined.

Who has been notified?

I understand from the hon. member for Albany that this has occurred.

Why didn’t he say who had been notified?

I am following his argument, and I say if that is so, it does seem a wrong procedure to offer bursaries whilst some of the most valued men we have are in a state of considerable unsettlement in regard to their own position. Perhaps the Minister will take this opportunity of telling us what re-organization he is effecting in that particular department, because there have been a certain number of senior veterinary officers passed over by men who are their junior by 15 or 20 years. That does not seem to me to be altogether fair, in view of their professional ability and the faithful manner in which these men have served the department. It was quite well understood when Union was brought about that men who were in the service at that time would not in any way suffer in their promotion Or grade through being unilingual.

The hon. member must not go into the question of reorganization.

I was just dealing with that one question and wondering whether the Minister would avail himself of the opportunity of explaining it in the course of his reply.

I cannot allow the Minister to explain a question of reorganization.

It is very strange that members on the opposite benches this afternoon are preaching so strongly for having white labour on the farms.

We have preached it for years.

They had 14 years to do it. Why did they not do it?

You have been in office now for two or three years, and you have not made a start yet.

I can, tell the hon. member that we are working in that direction.

It is very slow.

It is no use forcing it, The Minister of Labour and I are working in that direction. It is no use hurrying over matters and expecting that we can do that at once. Some provision would have to be made. Would the hon. member be satisfied if we asked for some £100,000 to build hostels? If we embark on that policy we ought to have hostels for those boys.

Don’t you exaggerate the cost.

It is no use arguing that point.

†*The hon. member for George (Mr. Brink) complained about the bad treatment of George in connection with development work. The south-western districts now have the whole faculty Stellenbosch-Elsenburg at their disposal, and still want more. They are now dissatisfied because one man is taken away, I think that if they consider it well they will be satisfied, because they have excellent services from Stellenbosch.

We have been asking for a sheep expert for three years and cannot get one.

I will make a note of it, but it cannot be expected of the Agricultural Department to teach all the farmers how to classify their sheep. There are 32,000,000 sheep, and the official can only do a certain amount every year. It is very easy to say that we should get more officials, but on the other hand complaints are made if taxation is increased. As regards an experimental farm at George, I must tell the hon. member that we are doing a great deal in that direction, but cannot have an experimental farm at every place. The hon. member for Von Brandis (Mr. Nathan) asked me a few questions, the reply to which is that the vote was there last year as well.

†The hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat) has complained that the amount we are spending for labour is too high.

Quite right.

I can only tell him that the courses in these agricultural schools have now been changed. It was formerly two years, but now when a boy goes to the school he must know the practical side of farming. I do not know whether the hon. member has visited one of these schools. He would find that these boys have not a minute idle. Last year I had a complaint from parents in various parts that the boys were given too much work. Now the hon. member says they are not being worked hard enough. We get out of these boys as much work as we can. As far as white labour is concerned, the Minister of Labour and myself have that question under consideration to see how far we can apply white labour. It is impossible to do it in one year; we must have time. The hon. member for Griqualand (Mr. Gilson) has raised the question of having shearing machines at agricultural schools. If the farmers are willing to go in for a white labour policy we will do it: if they want white boys to shear instead of natives we will go in for that. Let the farmers come forward and agree to that, and then will be the time for the Government to move in that direction. The hon. member wanted some wheat experimental farms. I have already explained that I am not going to do more in that direction.

What about reducing the cost of the analysis of the soil? You have not answered that.

The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) has raised the question of the cost of labour. I have explained already that the boys are doing as much as they can at present. The hon. member for Umvoti (Mr. Deane) has raised the question of cattle for the production of beef, and the importation of pedigree bulls. Let me say at once that we are not competing against the breeders in the Union. What we are having at the schools is cattle for educational purposes, and for that purpose we are getting the best stock we can, but we are not going to keep more cattle than are required for educational purposes on these farms. We do not want to compete with the breeders. Then the question was raised yesterday, and I replied over and over again, as to when we will be able to import bulls from England. I told the House that the High Commissioner is now busy with the Imperial Government to give us a quarantine station there. If they cannot do it, we have made arrangements with Rhodesia as to whether we can hire a piece of ground, and as soon as the Imperial Government has decided we will go on with the matter.

Is that piece of ground in England?

Yes, we want a piece of ground in England near the docks, and we should work hand in hand with Rhodesia so as to use that for a quarantine station; but it would be better if the Imperial Government would do it on their own account, and that is why we are awaiting the result. I want to say, with reference to the question of Clarke, that it was fully discussed last year, and I am not going to reply further on that point. There was no grader in South Africa to be found. This man is not under the civil service law; he is on contract for three years, and when that period has expired we will deal with the matter again.

One is surprised to hear that the Minister goes to England for an official, a man to take charge of an agricultural department, and then, because he is not bilingual, he discharges him. That method is very different from that of the hon. member for Oudtshoorn (Mr. le Roux) and the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden)—

What item is the hon. member discussing now?

No particular item, Mr. Chairman—overseas scholars. They did not worry whether they were bilingual or not. They wanted the best man. That is the important point, to get the best man for the job.

I think the Minister has been somewhat discourteous this afternoon. I asked him specific questions, which appeared perfectly justified, in reference to an item on page 146. His answer was that I should go through fourteen pages and I would see that this is a repetition of a previous vote last year. I have done my best in the time allotted to me to find this. Why cannot the Minister be sufficiently courteous and say that if the hon. member will look at page so-and-so he will find the information he is seeking?

I have said nothing about 14 pages.

That shows the ignorance again of the Minister. He said that if I would refer to the previous Vote—

He said “last year.”

If you take the same page 146, you will see that under J1 there is an item of £480 which does not appear under “1926-’27.” Then there is an item of £100, which does not appear for 1926-’27, and also an item for £2,450 which does not appear for 1926-’27. There is no information whatsoever.

I do not want to interrupt; I cannot follow what Estimates the hon. member is on.

I believe the very same Estimates you have before you, sir; that is, for the year ending 31st March, 1928.

What particular point is the hon. member discussing?

I will endeavour to make myself understood. If you take page 146, Vote 29, Agriculture (Education), continued, you will see in line 5—Malmesbury, J1, salaries, wages and allowances, £480. In the next line you will find, J2—subsistence and transport £100, and in the line after J3, general maintenance expenses, £2,450. When the Minister says they are the same items as last year, I say he is mistaken, because we do not find them in the printed copy of the Estimates we have in this House. I have a right to ask, and I feel it my duty to do so. We have our duty to our constituents. [Interruption.]

Members must not interrupt the hon. member, allow him to make the speech.

In the next column, under 1926-’27, nothing appears in the Estimates with regard to these three items.

If the hon. member will just look up page 152 and will look at the foot of the page, he will find all the information he has asked for. It is not a new vote. Last year it was under Vote 28—animal and field husbandry, experiment stations—and it has been transferred to Vote 29.

I think the Minister’s refusal to give us any further explanations of his illogical actions in connection with the non-appointment of a young South African who qualified in America and his appointment of a unilingual cotton grower, was quite unreasonable, because he has said that the cases are not parallel, as in the case of the cotton grader no man of similar qualification was to be got in South Africa. I venture to suggest that the cases are distinctly parallel. The Minister ought to reconsider the matter, and give us his reasons for refusing to appoint one man and appointing the other. There is one other matter to which I should like to draw attention, and that is, for some time past various lecturers at agricultural colleges have been allowed to contribute articles to the press, but since the Minister’s regime this permission has been withdrawn.

On what vote are you speaking?

I am speaking on agricultural education.

I am afraid that is a question of policy. The hon. member will see that. It is not a question of administration. The hon. member can ask the Minister a question.

I ask the Minister whether he will not reconsider the instructions he has given that lecturers and others—the staff at Cedara—must not be allowed to contribute to the press, because there is something of an inequality in allowing other officers of the department, for example, the chief of the poultry division, to publish works and to sell them for their own benefit, in the manner to which I referred last night. Will the Minister not allow the lecturers at schools of agriculture to continue the good work done in the past and contribute articles to the press?

I can reply to that at once. I am not prepared to reconsider that—or that officials of the department should be allowed to write to the papers. If there is anything they are anxious to write, there is a paper of the department which is a monthly issue, and to which I have no objection if they should contribute to it. With reference to the other point raised by the hon. member, I have already indicated to the committee that this question was fully debated last year. The hon. member will see if he goes through Hansard; and I see no purpose in going through this again.

You have no parallel.

I explained to the hon. gentleman, with reference to the cotton grader, that it is an altogether different thing. The cotton grader is paid out of a levy under an agreement with the cooperative association working on the cotton lands. He is under contract for three years. I could not get a cotton grader here and had to cable to England for one. What is the use of discussing the matter again?

No doubt hon. members hung on the words of the Minister last year, but since then a good many things have happened, and hon. members must be excused if they have forgotten some of the things the Minister told them last session. I would suggest that the Minister should look after the interests of the Government and the youth of the country by acting on the same business principles displayed by the farmers who are wool-growers in dealing with the Boere-Saamwerk, which I understand is a Nationalist organization.

A farmers’ organization.

Largely supported by Nationalists.

And Unionists.

It is a very good organization and showed very much better business principles than did the Minister, for it tried to find a wool expert in Australia who is unilingual to assist our farmers. I want the Minister to do exactly the same in his department. What is good enough for the hon. member for Oudtshoorn) Mr. le Roux) and the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) who hold very strong Nationalist views ought to be good enough for the Minister. The Department of Agriculture has sent a young man to the United States to study for two or more years and paid all his expenses. On his return if the young man is more efficient than the ordinary run of those who have taken bursaries, is it not part of the agreement that if there is a vacancy he should receive a staff appointment? I think the hon. member for Illovo (Mr. Marwick) has done extremely well in bringing the case forward. Wherever you have a position in a Government department and where you deal with people in the country who have not a knowledge of both languages you must have bilingual officials, but when you are dealing with students in a department like that of plant pathology you should select the most able man you can get; on the same basis as the hon. members for Graaff-Reinet and Oudtshoorn acted. They did not get him, not because he was unilingual, but because he wanted a little more money than they were prepared to pay. They travelled many hundreds of miles across Australia for the purpose of securing his services and we all felt that for once sanity was entering into business arrangements. Why has not the Minister done the same in this particular case? And this is not the only case. I think the Minister gets the best out of his officials, but I think he discriminates very often through carrying the principle of bi-lingualism to an extreme and not in the general interests of the country. Why did he not appoint in the plant pathology department a man like Dr. Hatton who is not bilingual, but who is one of the greatest authorities in the world on plant pathology. The Minister turned (him down. Certainly that might have been in the interests of political propaganda, but it was not in the interests of a great horticultural industry in which millions of pounds have been invested.

I am at a loss to understand the attitude taken up by the Opposition in regard to bilingualism. We have had a three days’ discussion on two inspectors in Natal because they could not write proper English, and to-day I am attacked because I do not want to appoint a man who does not understand the Dutch language. Surely we expect by now that all persons appointed, especially in the department of agriculture, should be bilingual. The Public Service Commission in 1920 stated that it was most essential that the officials in the Agricultural Department should be bilingual.

But not the highly trained officials.

What about the Civil Service Act of 1924?

Then why did you appoint a unilingual cotton-grader?

Because we had not one here. Do you object to my getting one from England?

No.

What is the difficulty then? Why should I appoint Dr. Hatton when we have good men in South Africa? Do you object to my placing the plant pathology section under the leadership of Dr. Pole-Evans?

I am not discussing Dr. Pole-Evans.

He has the Horticultural Department under him now.

He is not chief of the Horticultural Department.

Does the hon. member object I gave it to Dr. Pole-Evans? He has done excellent service in the past. With reference to the question raised, I explained that last year the question was fully argued in this House. The contract the hon. member says now is a breach of contract was not entered into by me, but by the previous Government, and I found when the man came here he was not bilingual, and could not do the work among the farmers which I expected him to do. Every student going out of the colleges to-day to train in European centres is fully bilingual, or he does not get a bursary. It must be so, otherwise the whole position is a farce. Both sections should be treated equally, and it is the duty of both sides of the House to co-operate and see that every official in the future should be bilingual. It is extraordinary extra expense for all the translators we have got which the taxpayer has to pay. If every man was thoroughly bilingual, this money could be saved.

What do you mean by thoroughly bilingual?

For goodness’ sake, do not start hair-splitting now.

I think the House will agree that the time has come, especially in the Agricultural Department, where all the officials, and all of them have to come into contact with the public, are bilingual. The most complaints I have had is that if I send an expert to a certain area and he can only address the people in one language. That is the main objection I have had since I took over the department, and that is why every member of the Agricultural Department should be thoroughly bilingual, and I hope hon. members on the other side will not press that point. If we have to go outside to get a man we shall do so; when you say to me—

I answer that that is a private business, and has not got the same work the Government department has got.

The hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) quite misses the point when he refers to the attempt of the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr, I. P. van Heerden) to get a certain person in Australia to come and do work in connection with the Boere-Saamwerk. It is the fact of being bilingual that makes a person’s services worth more. The principle of bilingualism is adopted in South Africa because it not only satisfies both white races, but because it is good business. I think that no man in the public service can give full satisfaction unless he is fully bilingual. Therefore the Minister is quite right in demanding that if a person is sent out of the country to qualify in a certain specialty, then he must be bilingual, so that he can give his best services to the country. It just happens that the Boere-Saamwerk had special need of a wool expert, and of one who was acquainted with co-operative marketing. Because there was no one in South Africa who was considered specially qualified, the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet tried to get someone in Australia. He found someone, and offered him a certain salary, but the board of the Boere-Saamwerk informed him that it could not pay more than a certain amount. Because the person was not satisfied with that, he did not come. If he had been bilingual the board would have decided that he was worth more, but because he was not bilingual the board would not pay the salary he asked. His services were required for a special need, but I am informed the board was not prepared to pay more than a certain amount for his services. If he had been bilingual he would have been worth more, and would then possibly have been appointed by the Boere-Saamwerk. Consequently, I think that the, hon. member for Fort Beaufort is entirely wrong to come and criticize the Government about expenses being incurred in appointing bilingual officials. I consider that bilingual officials alone are efficient. We must maintain the principle that persons who are not efficient must not be appointed to the public service. Otherwise, the officials cannot render proper service to the two races.

The Minister has just said for the last three days we have been complaining about dipping inspectors because they were unilingual. Nothing of the kind. I distinctly said I did not mind if they were unilingual, if they were efficient. The Minister must not misconstrue words used in this House. It is unfair and unjust, and he should withdraw.

Before putting the vote, might I say I was approving of my friend’s action because, in the responsible position he found himself placed, he wanted to do the best for the farmers of this country, and he was only doing his duty in looking out for the best man. The man they were anxious to get was an admirable man, and would have been an acquisition to the organization and to the country. I was trying to impress on the Minister that, if it is in the interests of the farming community, you should look for the best man you can get. Get him bilingual if you can, but if not, see he is the best technical man you can lay your hands on. I was relying on my friend’s support to impress that on the Minister, because he will impress the Minister more than I can. I was not discussing Dr. Pole-Evans. I was talking about the chief horticulturist, and I was pointing out that it was a pity, when the vacancy occurred by the death of Dr. Tribolet, the Minister did not take the advice of Dr. Webber, who rendered great service to this country, and take the opportunity of putting at the head of the department a man who was the greatest plant pathologist he knew in the world. There was an opportunity of getting the service of this man if he had been approached in the proper manner. My friend turned the question down from the beginning, because he said he was unilingual. My point was that, in the case of the head of a big department of that sort, it is unnecessary to be bilingual, as it is for officers going round the country. I realize that, all other things being equal, in bilingual countries you must have bilingual officials, but in a great technical department where technical experiments are being carried out in the interests of the future of horticulture in this country, my hon. friend should not have let his prejudice weigh with him in that case, to the detriment of the fruit farmers of this country. If my hon. friend goes back to his office and turns up his communications, I think he will find a communication from the fruit exchange urging the essential need of placing a gentleman of that character at the head of this department. My hon. friend should not allow the country to suffer on account of his riding to death a principle which in itself is extremely good and which has been recognized by both parties. I notice that for the Stellenbosch-Elsenburg college and schools, the vote this year is £53,200, while the vote last year was £44,400. If the Minister refers to another estimate which conies under another Minister, he will find that the vote for the University of Stellenbosch this year is £46,400, as against £42,290 last year. In the one case you have an increase of rather over £4,000, and in the other case the Stellenbosch-Elsenburg agricultural college and schools, you have an increase of £8,755. I Was under the impression, when the amalgamation took place, that it would be the means of saving money both to the university and the college.

In the long run.

Perhaps my hon. friend will explain how it is that that money has not been saved. That is a thing to which I might call the attention of the Minister of Finance, whom I am glad to find in a more gracious mood to-day than he was yesterday. I would like to mention the question raised by my hon. friend the member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) in regard to Elsenburg, and the grave dissatisfaction that, I understand, exists in reference to that institution. Perhaps the Minister will be good enough to explain to the committee what really the position is since the amalgamation took place, the reason why the votes have increased, what the number of students at Elsenburg is at the present time, and whether everything is going on in a satisfactory manner.

I put some questions to the Minister the other evening, but, unfortunately, I was not present when he replied. Perhaps as the vote is now under discussion, the Minister will reply. I also put a point about the Government financing the storage of the year’s pluck of ostrich feathers.

The right hon. the member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) has put a question to me as to why the expenditure on the Stellenbosch-Elsenburg faculty is larger than it was last year. When the Act was introduced last year we pointed out that in the long run there would be a saving, and I hope that in the long run there will be a saving. The expenditure is higher this year because the staff of the faculty at Stellenbosch-Elsenburg has been increased, and increased for this reason, that all the extension work which Elsenburg has been conducting in this part of the Cape will now fall under the faculty. We wanted more officials for extension work. Another reason for the increase of expenditure is that professors came over as officials. Professors had previously been working nine months in the year, and they would not come over unless they were paid for the additional period for which they are now serving. Therefore, they have to get extra remuneration. Another item which occasioned more expenditure is that a few new posts had to be created. On the recommendation of the faculty some new posts were created which were essential in certain directions for research. The right hon. gentleman has put a few questions as to alleged dissatisfaction at Elsenburg under the amalgamation. I might say that it may be very difficult to please everybody, but I am not aware of dissatisfaction there, unless, perhaps, one of the officials at Elsenburg wanted the same increase as the professors who were working nine months while the officials remained on their ordinary scale. The hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) has also brought up a few questions. He asked me whether Mr. Stahl has been promoted. Mr. Stahl has been promoted, but his work has not been lost to this part of the country. The hon. member also asked what are the qualifications of the acting-principal of Elsenburg. He had long service in the department prior to joining the university. He is dean of the faculty of agriculture, and it was the recommendation of the university that he should act as principal of Elsenburg. His other qualifications I think the hon. member knows. He is one of our best entomologists, and is fully qualified. The hon. member asked me about Mr. Crawford. Mr. Crawford is now stationed at Port Elizabeth, and he is experimenting with arsenic to find out how to treat fruit. He has been transferred to the Chemistry Department because we think that is more in his line. With reference to Mr. Baker, he has been engaged with flax somewhere near George, and he has simply been transferred nearer to the place where he is working. With reference to Dr. Pettie, he is still here, so he is not lost to Elsenburg or to this part of the province. Further, we are strengthening the department by sending up Dr. Mally, now on leave at Stellenbosch, and one of our best entomologists, to help the farmers in this direction. To the question of ostrich feathers, I have already replied yesterday, and I said that the amount was voted by the House last year, and it was an advance of £112,000 given to the ostrich feather farmers and at a later date we will be able to discuss the question when the money has to be re-voted.

I want to raise with the Minister the matter of the breeds of cattle which are being kept in the agricultural colleges. Some two years ago there was a reorganization of these colleges and I understand that on the recommendation of Dr. Thornton it was not considered necessary to keep the shorthorn breed for demonstration purposes. We were given to understand that at some future date it might be possible to replace these herds. A demonstration of cattle in any agricultural college in the world that does not include the short-horn breed, is not giving the students fully representative breeds to work on. There is no breed in the world which takes the place of the short-horn or stands before the short-horn.

That is your individual opinion.

Yes, and it is the opinion of cattle breeders throughout the world. I am not saying it is the best breed for specialized purposes, but wherever you go through the cattle-breeding districts of the world, there it has its place and in most countries pride of place. I take it it is the public performance of the animals you have to look to. Take the Bloemfontein show. What animal won the cup for the best milker in the dairy class? What won the cup at Bloemfontein? Why, the shorthorns. At the Rand show, which is the premier cattle show in the Union for fat stock in September, you find a very large percentage of prizes going to the short-horns. I am not arguing that it goes to show they are the best breed, but it does show that a very large proportion of cattle breeders in the Union consider that the shorthorn breed is the most suitable for their purposes. In Durban I inspected large numbers of cattle which were being exported from Rhodesia for Italy. Ninety per cent. were the shorthorn cross. When you are going to train the youth of this country, when you are going to select various breeds for demonstration, I cannot understand any man who says that the shorthorn should not have a place in the agricultural colleges of this country. You have Afrikanders, and rightly so, Frieslands, Ayrshires, red prills and black polls and yet apparently it is not considered necessary to give the shorthorn a place. I say it is absolutely wrong, and it is an action which has given the greatest offence to breeders of the shorthorn in South Africa. We have never had a valid reason from the Minister or his department for turning down the shorthorn. We had lame excuses put forward by Dr. Thornton, excuses which did not hold water, and we have been compelled to accept those excuses. Let the Minister go through the length and breadth of the cattle districts of this country, and he will see that, at any rate, the shorthorn deserves its place.

What about the red poll?

What about the white leghorn?

I hope the Minister will take this very seriously. The House seems rather inclined to treat it as a joke, but there is no joke about it. The breeders’ society is entitled to an explanation from the Minister. If the Minister cannot advance a very sound reason why the shorthorn as a breed of cattle is inferior to the red poll, the black poll—

The north pole?

—the Friesland or the Ayrshire, let him take steps to replace them at the colleges and give them their place among the demonstration breeds in these colleges. You had a magnificent herd at Bloemfontein. You dispersed that herd and what happened? One of the animals sold with that took the grand championship at the Johannesburg show above all other breeds. At Cedara you had a dairy type, able to hold its own with other types, and again you threw them ruthlessly on one side. I hope the Minister, in consultation with his friends in the bay, will be able to give me an answer that will be satisfactory, at any rate, to breeders of the shorthorn in South Africa.

I rise on account of the remark made by the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) in which he— a past Minister of Agriculture—stated that the Boere-Saamwerk was an organization of the Nationalist party. I am much disappointed about the remark.

I said that most of the members were Nationalists.

No, the hon. member did not only say that. Does he, however, object to the Boere-Saamwerk being supported by Nationalists?

No, I much appreciated the business capacity of the undertaking.

I have always had the greatest respect for the hon. member and I said in the House more than once that he did good work for the farmers as Minister of Agriculture but this afternoon I was disappointed with him. I know there are people who hate the Boere-Saamwerk, because it was established by Dutch-speaking Afrikanders, and I know that they do not want Dutch-speaking people to go in for business. They should merely be exploited. They look at the progress of the Dutch-speaking Afrikanders grudgingly. I want to add that we are behind the Minister of Agriculture when he appoints bilingual officials because officials should be bilingual.

You need not say that.

Why may I not say it? Hon. members opposite can, however, make a fuss when our Ministers will not appoint unilingual officials. The whole country supports the Minister in following that policy. Let me tell the hon. member for Fort Beaufort that the organization which he described as one of the Nationalist party only employs bilingual people and they are all efficient. Accordingly we do not only handle the wool of Nationalists but also thousands of bales belonging to S.A.P. supporters and even many bales belonging to old Unionists. That is because they are more sensible than the hon. member for Fort Beaufort. When they find a good organization they co-operate with it. When the hon. member was Minister of Agriculture he preached co-operation, but now that the farmers have formed this organization he says it is a party one. I protest against that.

In supporting what the hon. member for Griqualand (Mr. Gilson) said I would like to ask the Minister why he got rid of the shorthorn stock at Cedara. I see a new item of £350, milk for dairy courses at Cedara. These colleges should produce sufficient milk and cream for their own demonstrations. I agree with my hon. friend that these cattle do not come up to the shorthorn. A shorthorn has the world’s championship today, and at the dairy show in London last year a shorthorn took the championship. These are world’s records. Why these cattle have been got rid of it is difficult to know. In February at the Perth sales two calves nine months old were sold for 2,200 and 2,000 guineas, and you cannot say that for any other breed.

In reference to the remarks made by my hon. friend on the right (Mr. Gilson), I may say that they have purchased shorthorns for experimental purposes; only last month officials from the agricultural department came to my district to do so. I hope the Minister will see that the agricultural department purchases oxen of other breeds, so as to give competition, and to see how they come out under the feeding experiment to be undertaken by the department. Next year we shall see the results, and how they will turn out for slaughter. I shall not pursue the subject any longer, for good wine needs no bush.

I would like to ask the Minister whether he could give us any information about the bureau of national information. I understand that last year the Auditor-General referred to the fact that the department in seven months spent £35,000 on telegrams on this bureau, and that during a further twelve months the account for telegrams alone amounted to something in the neighbourhood of £100,000. What was the cost of this bureau, and what is the actual result?

Under what vote does this fall.

The Minister of Agriculture seems to have snaffled—I do not like to use the word—that money out of his vote.

If there is no item on that subject down here, I am afraid the hon. member cannot speak on it.

If the hon. member will bring it up when the vote posts, telegraphs and telephones is under consideration the Minister will reply to it.

The Minister was good enough to give us some information about Elsenburg, but I should like to ask with regard to these increments to the staff whether this does not amount to unfair discrimination with regard to the old members of the staff. The other point I put was with regard to the services of Professor Crawford who has been detached from Elsenburg. Experiments were being conducted there for which his presence was highly necessary. Would not his time and experience be better devoted to continuing the experiments he was conducting there? Another question I put to him was about Dr. Petty. The Minister said it was not intended to transfer him until the matter was satisfactorily dealt with. That seemed to suggest that he would be removed from that area, and that caused some amount of discontent in the district. Another question I asked was as to the position of young fellows from overseas who come out here to become farmers and whose training can most suitably be undertaken at Elsenburg. The number of these young fellows has been decreased because half of the course at Elsenburg is carried on through the medium of Afrikaans. Is not the reduction of students from 30 to 21 due to this? In regard to Mr. Baker the Minister told me last February that he was stationed in the college here, but now I understand he is at George.

There are 39 students at Elsenburg, and the reason there are fewer this year is because the course has been changed from two years to one year. In the Free State we have 99 students, and we have more applicants than we have accommodation. I hope that in future Elsenburg will be so conducted that it will receive more students. I dealt fully with the language question at Elsenburg yesterday. Officers at Elsenburg who are doing university work will be promoted; there is no difficulty about that, if they are doing university work. They cannot expect that they will be promoted if they are doing ordinary work. The professors of the Stellenbosch University work only nine months out of the twelve, but on becoming civil servants, they have to work full time. With reference to the transfer of Mr. Crawford, we expect better work from him. As to Dr. Pettey, I cannot give a guarantee that he will not be removed when he has finished his experimental work. I cannot keep him there all his life.

Let me say at the outset how much hon. members on this side of the House appreciate the Minister’s courtesy in answering our questions in English. I hope he will give us some assurance with regard to farm economics and how far his educational establishments are dealing with this important subject. A farmer is really a manufacturer, who makes food and raw materials for clothing out of soil, air and water, and this has to be done at a profit. All our instruction is intended to teach agricultural students how to carry on their operations at a profit. You can go as far as you like in scientific research, but we want the practical application of all this to show how raw materials can be made to show a profit. It has been said that no farmer ever went bankrupt who kept books.

I have heard it said that every farmer who keeps books will find that he is bankrupt.

The period of a farmer’s bankruptcy would be reduced if he kept books, and it is essential that a farmer should keep books showing definitely which way he is going. The success of dairying consists largely in a farmer keeping accurate records of the products of his cows, which will show him which are profit-makers and which are farm-robbers. Surely it is desirable for a farmer to be able to know which of his crops are profitable and which are not. It should not be beyond the intellects of our very highly specialized staff to devise some simple and effective form of books which would enable the farmer to gain that information. I am thinking, too, of the effect on the mind of the Minister of Finance when he comes to collect the income tax. It ought to be encouraged from every point of view. The difficulty the farmer has of ascertaining whether he is liable to income tax would be obviated if it had been insisted on when he was a young man in college it was desirable to keep proper books of account. I urge upon the Minister to put up in every classroom a card with the words “produce at a profit.” If they don’t they will very shortly cease to produce at all, and I do not think too much attention can be paid to that. I have been unable to find any reference in the annual reports to this particular phase of it. The general word “economics” does not convey very much, and every man who spends two years at these central colleges should receive a thorough grounding in this, and I think it might be desirable if they do not receive a certificate of proficiency, unless they have passed in this important subject. I do not think it has received the consideration during the debate it should have had.

I might point out that as soon as the estimates are passed an officer of economics will be appointed for each of the schools. The vote has taken a long time now, and I hope it will now be passed.

But I want to know about shorthorn cattle first.

Surely there are enough shorthorn breeders in this country, and I shall not re-introduce them into the agricultural colleges. This question has been answered before at great length.

Have experiments been conducted since last year in the direction of producing a form which will make it less palatable? It was thought this might be done by odorizing or discolouring the powder. Natives very often use this form of revenge on their masters, and if it could be more easily detected, it would greatly minimize the risk of poisoning.

But that comes under the Veterinary Research Vote, which we passed yesterday.

Well, it is only a question I am putting as to whether anything has been done in the direction indicated.

I am afraid I cannot accept the Minister’s answer to this cattle question.

I cannot help it.

Then you can hear more about it.

I am quite prepared to listen.

The Minister tells us shorthorn cattle are not represented in the experimental farms, because there are enough breeders in the country. That argument won’t do. There are far more Friesland breeders in the country, so why does he not do away with the Friesland and keep more of the shorthorn? The object of his experimental stations and farms is to secure the best breeds of seeds and animals. That alone is a sound enough argument to include shorthorns. It is not a question of individual breeders. It is a question of training students in the management of the various breeds of cattle, and demonstrating to them the good and bad points of all the leading breeds of cattle in the world. By doing away with the shorthorn breed you are saying in effect that you think it is worth while instructing farmers in connection with Friesland, red poll and Ayrshire, but not worth while instructing them in the good qualities of the shorthorn breed. It is equivalent to telling them that it is not necessary to tell them anything about shorthorn, because it is a breed you do not think is satisfactory in the country. The Minister apparently has an adviser with a mistaken idea of the economic value of the shorthorn. Are we, the taxpayers, to have no say in this matter? Have we to take no notice of the practical advice and opinion of the farmer? When we send our sons to these experimental farms and we say we want them to have an object lesson on the shorthorn breed, are we not to get it? I do not think the Minister is fair in this matter. It is a matter he ought to concede. There are many other enthusiastic breeders who pin their faith to a certain breed, and they have a right to see the breed is represented in these schools. I hope the Minister will give this matter consideration, and not turn round and say he has consulted his adviser; we should like to know his name, and if he has such a poor opinion of the shorthorn, let him put his reasons down in the “Agricultural Journal” reports, and give us a chance to refute them. I am afraid this is going to be an annual question with those of us who take an interest in cattle breeding. We shall certainly bring it up year after year until we get satisfaction. I hope the Minister will remember it is not a question we bring up in a desire to waste time.

Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 8.6 p.m.

One more point I want to bring to the Minister’s notice. I am sorry if I have offended the hon. member for Ceres (Mr. Roux), who had occasion to interject. I want to discuss the question of sheep. It is a very curious thing that we have in this country more sheep than New Zealand has; we have about 30,000,000 sheep, and yet New Zealand is able to export 4,000,000 carcases for the overseas market every year, whilst our export is nil. I would suggest to the Minister that the New Zealand export is largely due to the breeding of fat lamb, and that he might put in hand on a fairly large scale experiments in the breeding of fat lamb. I believe that in our lucerne areas there is a very big opening for that branch of the farming industry. I am glad to see that his department recognizes the possibilities in that direction. I see that the Minister has an amount of £600 for bursaries at the veterinary faculty, Onderstepoort. I presume that means a possible increase in the number of veterinary surgeons, the training of veterinary surgeons locally. I think that is a very wise policy, because there are so many matters that we need to have investigated. I would suggest to the Minister that he should give a little attention to “grass staggers” in horses. In my own district it is getting almost impossible to breed and keep horses, simply because of what is called “grass staggers.” If this vote is going to give him any increase in his veterinary staff, I would ask him to take this matter in hand. This trouble is spreading, and it is rapidly becoming a menace, and I think if anything can be done by the Minister in that direction it would be money well spent.

I hope the Minister will pardon me if I rise at this late stage. I want to approach the Minister on what is a very important point. Some two years ago I raised the question of the development of agricultural training in native areas. We know that the native areas are not properly developed, and that they should carry a larger population than they carry at present. I am speaking more especially for areas outside my own, where we have a native agricultural institution that is carrying on its duties. I want to quote a speech made in this House—

Under what item are you raising this?

Agricultural education, the one thing we want in this country, agricultural education for the natives. That is where I think the Government is failing.

On which item is the hon. member speaking?

We are discussing the agricultural education vote, I take it.

The hon. member is now permitted only to discuss administration, and that being so, he must confine himself to a certain item or items.

Agricultural schools.

Which schools? I will now put the vote.

Before you put the vote, I want to call attention to the interesting subject which my hon. friend (Mr. Payn) was raising, namely, agricultural education. We have Vote 29, 1, principal, Elsenburg Agricultural College. A certain amount of agricultural education is carried on at those colleges, and I presume that on that vote my hon. friend will be in order in discussing the question that he raised just now. I wish to call attention to that particular vote, and I would like to hear from the Minister what his views are as to the advancement of this agricultural education. I think that is a suitable subject for my hon. friend to carry on the discussion.

Do I understand from you, Mr. Chairman, that I am entirely debarred from discussing the question of agricultural education for natives?

That is a matter of policy. You cannot discuss policy at present.

I do not think there is anything that debars natives from attending the agricultural institutions of this country. I think that in putting forward suggestions in regard to this vote as to how it affects the natives, I am within my rights. I do say that in discussing this matter, which affects natives, I shall be within my rights, as natives, as the law stands, have a legal tight to attend these colleges.

I have given my ruling. The hon. member has heard what I said.

Am I entitled to ask the Minister a question?

Yes.

I would ask the Minister, is it entirely outside the functions of the Agricultural Department of this country to in any way consider native agricultural education? Does this vote in any way make provision for the development of native agricultural education?

Some time ago I got a letter from a well-known bacteriologist in Australia, who complained that he sends this blue tongue vaccine, but that every consignment is held up at Durban, because Sir Arnold Theiler says this vaccine can only be sold and distributed in South Africa after the inventor has in South Africa experimented on live sheep. He complains that this makes it quite impossible for him to sell this vaccine, and he has provided me with a large amount of expert testimony from Australia, showing that it is an extremely useful remedy for blue tongue. I would like to ask the Minister whether it would not be possible to alter that system to some extent. Sir Arnold Theiler wrote to me about it and put the matter quite fairly, showing me the danger, but I think the Minister might inquire and see whether there is not a middle course to prevent the complete exclusion of valuable remedies. I hope the Minister will see whether something can be done.

With reference to the question of the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (South) I just want to say that certain regulations were issued with reference to the use and importation of patent medicines. They are not admitted unless the contents are stated on the bottle. If the contents are stated with reference to the medicines the hon. member spoke about, and it is found that they are satisfactory, they can be imported. The hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. Payn) asked what the policy of the Government was in relation to agricultural education for natives. That is a matter connected with the native policy of the Government, and will be dealt with it in that connection. As to the question of the hon. member for Griqualand East (Mr. Gilson) about horses, I may tell him that experiments were formerly made with horses, but we now limit them to Potchefstroom when we farm with the heavy kind of horse. Then the hon. member pleaded for the farmer with fat slaughter sheep. Experiments are being carried out in this matter at Elsenburg and Potchefstroom. Then he objected to the bursaries for children to go to Onderstepoort. Applications are constantly being received for veterinary surgeons in various districts, and it is remarkable that hon. members representing farmers now want to prevent veterinary surgeons being trained to provide for the existing need which will become particularly great, inasmuch as a large number will be retiring in a few years. Now the member objects to the policy of training our children in that direction.

Again I wish to raise this question. I have before me a report of the Native Affairs Commission, in which a recommendation is made that the Minister of Agriculture should appoint an officer from his department to deal with native agricultural education.

I have told the hon. member that there is no item here on which he could discuss that point. He might have discussed the question when the salary of the Minister was put. At this stage I cannot allow him to discuss it.

On Vote 29 (1), “Other Scholarships,” £3,700, I would like to know whether the Minister has provided for any of these scholarships to be given to men, either European or natives, who will make a special study of the best methods of instruction of natives in proper agricultural methods. We all want to see the natives of South Africa using their land to better advantage. I would like to see appointed a staff of expert Europeans or other men who have made a special study of conditions under which the natives farm and live. This head merely says “other scholarships, £3,700, and I would like to know whether it includes provision in this direction.

I have already explained to the hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. Payn) that that is a question which will be dealt with by the Government in its native policy.

The Minister was good enough to answer one of my queries with regard to the Elsenburg Agricultural College and the Stellenbosch University, and he stated that the reason for the increase of the vote over the vote of last year in connection with the Stellenbosch University was owing to the fact that research work had been taken from Elsenburg College and transferred to the university.

I did not say it was taken away.

No, but the Minister says that research work is being carried out by the university instead of by the college.

I said that more research work was being carried out.

The Minister did not tell me why the Elsenburg vote had been increased by £6,000 to £8,000, because if they have taken away from Elsenburg a portion of the work they had been doing there, I should have thought that the grant in connection with Elsenburg would certainly not have required to be increased.

I explained the reasons this afternoon. I told the right hon. member that there was more research work being carried on now at Elsenburg and in the faculty. I never mentioned that research work had been taken away altogether. I told him that the staff had been increased because extension work has to be done now by the faculty together with Elsenburg. These were the main reasons why the expense is greater than last year. I told the House last year, when we passed the Act, that although the expenditure might be more for the present, we hoped that in time we should save money by the amalgamation. We cannot help it that we have to appoint extra men, and that the professors who come over to be paid extra.

I asked the Minister a question about the suggested discrimination between the faculty and the staff who formerly were at Elsenburg and remained there. He said the faculty were doing a full year’s work instead of nine months. Is it correct that some of the staff at Elsenburg have also to do lecturing work at Stellenbosch, additional work, and yet remain on the same salary?

The staff at Elsenburg were all full-time officers. They are doing work at the faculty at Stellenbosch, and I have said already that if their work is satisfactory an increase in their salary will be arrived at. Every appointment is always on probation, and these men are doing the work on probation.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote 30, “Forestry,” £186,926,

I would like the Minister to give us some explanation of one or two points in connection with this vote. In the first place it seems very inconvenient that we have to discuss this vote before we have the estimates of loan expenditure before the House. My reason for saying that is this—if you look at the Auditor-General’s report it will be seen that there has been a discussion in the past as to what money should be spent under ordinary expenditure estimates and what money should be debited to loan account. There seems to have been a considerable difference of opinion as to the dividing line. We have not got the estimates of loan expenditure, so we do not know what it is proposed to spend under that head this year, nor do we know whether any agreement has been reached as to what should be debited to ordinary expenditure and what to loan account. There is another matter which arises out of this. We do not know from these figures what amount of money is being spent in connection with the employment of civilized labour, or European labour, if you like to call it so, instead of natives. The Auditor-General’s report shows that investigations which he made in connection with the previous year, reveal that the total expenditure during the year under review in forestry settlements, where white labour is employed, was £117,841, of which £61,319 is regarded as representing the additional cost entailed by the employment of European labour. He further goes on to say that this does not represent the total cost, because the cost of transporting these white labourers and their families to the settlements is borne by the Labour Department. I have looked at the estimates of expenditure of the Labour Department which are before us, and I suppose it comes under the heading of unemployment grants, but there is nothing shown in these estimates as to what division is made between the expenditure debited to this ordinary expenditure and expenditure debited to loan account, and, further, as to what proportion of this expenditure now before us is represented by the employment of European labour, practically at relief works, instead of natives. It seems to me that this entirely supports the argument which was more than once raised this session that if you are once going to adopt a policy to employ European labour on relief works, that should be carefully set out in a schedule. The House and the country should know what amount of money is spent in that way. We are spending a great deal of money on this department—nearly £200,000—besides that which may come along on the loan estimates. A question I should like to ask is whether the Minister is satisfied that we are growing the right sort of timber? There is a great deal of difference of opinion on that. I am told, for example, that fruit-growers, if they can help it, will not take boxes made from South African grown wood. They say that the pine wood is not odourless, and is heavier than the imported wood. Builders make the same objection, and say that it twists. It is the same thing with South African oak. They say it grows too quickly and rots too easily. It is the same thing with gum trees. I am told that the wood grown here is precisely the same kind as is grown in Australia. There seems to be a considerable prejudice against the South African wood. I would like to know, does the Minister know of this; is he satisfied that this prejudice is well founded, or that the people who are raising these objections are not raising them in ignorance of the true qualities of the wood. If these objections are justified, we are not getting good value on our expenditure on capital account and on the ordinary estimates. If they are not justified, it would be a good thing if the Minister gave publicity to the fact, and that he and his advisers are satisfied that those who in the ordinary course would use South African wood would not be let down in doing so.

I should like to hear from the Minister if there is an opportunity of taking more effective measures in preventing bush, veld and mountain fires. Bush and mountain fires have, as it were, become a national evil, and it appears our people are powerless against them. It is not that we lack legislation, but the difficulty is that we cannot arrest the offenders. Most of the streams of water rise in the mountains, and the fires damage the tributaries of the rivers. In that way the speed of the running water is increased. Most harm, I think, is done by cattle herds, hunters, and private owners who want to have better veld for their stock. It is no wonder that the people are crying out to be relieved of the evil, and that some divisional councils are insisting on severe legislation. Although I cannot recommend an absolute preventive of the evil, I can suggest a few things which may appear useful. In the first place, I want to ask the Minister if it is not possible to send out circulars through the Department of Education to all the public schools to ask the teachers to constantly explain to the children what danger and damage result from bush fires, and to point out to them the relative punishments. In this way We shall get a young generation who thoroughly know the injuries, and will guard and cooperate to prevent the evil. Another remedy I want to suggest is that the Minister, in cooperation with the Agricultural Department, should try to plant as a forest reserve ground which is not privately owned and where streams have their origin. In this way people will be prevented from using it for grazing cattle, and setting the young trees alight. A third suggestion is to ask the divisional councils to put up notice boards even at all private footpaths to the mountains to warn the people against fires, and to set out the relative punishments. In this way possibly something can be done to obviate the evil. We see that even in Cape Town it is difficult to prevent the destruction of vegetation and plantations by fire, and I therefore hope the Minister will in future do his best to prevent the evil.

I wish to support the appeal made by the hon. member for South Peninsula (Sir Drummond Chaplin) to the Minister. At the recent builders’ conference, held last month in Cape Town, this question was exhaustively discussed, because builders are interested in the timber resources, and are seriously alarmed. Every year 66 billion cubic feet of timber are used, and the annual replacement of the forests is only 38 billion cubic feet, with the natural result that the cost of timber and of building is going up. They appreciate what the Minister is doing, and they are in favour of this work being extended. They think that in this way European labour could be used instead of putting them on public works. In 1925 the importation into South Africa of soft and hard woods was something like 15,000,000 cubic feet, estimated to cost two and a half millions, or about £15 per 100 cubic feet. The value of the South African grown woods exported is about £2 10s. per 100 cubic feet, or one-sixth the value of the imported. So it appears that there is some point in what the hon. member for South Peninsula said—whether the wood we are growing is the right wood for building purposes. The builders think provision should be made to meet the destruction and the use made of these forests. Including the railway plantations, you have something like 139,000 acres under cultivation. Last year the Minister suggested that they were planting more than we are getting a return for, but the builders suggest that we should rather increase it, and that the Government should be asked to promote wood production in the Union. They view any slackening in this with alarm, and the following resolution which was passed at the congress, and which I commend to the Minister’s consideration, viz.—

I cannot at all agree with what the hon. member for Ladysmith (Mr. J. J. M. van Zyl) has said. He wants to stop mountain fires, and he even wants the children to be taught it at school. They must even be taught that wrong thing.

Do you want the fires to continue their ravages?

I can hear that a number of townsmen are talking who know nothing about farming. They only think about the flowers. If the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) were a sheep farmer, and did hot burn the veld, he would very soon become poor. I admit that there is a great difference in the ways of burning, but veld burning is necessary with us. If the Government want to prevent it on Crown land, that is their own business, but what right has the Government to prohibit sheep farmers, who have their beacons on top of the mountains, from burning the veld? Hon. members there know nothing of veld fires. Our farmers know that you cannot run sheep if the veld is not burned. The Minister visited us, and we took him about in a motor. We showed him the veld, and he saw how high the prickly bushes stood there, and he also saw the veld that had been burned, and how the blue grass stood two feet high there. We made him get out of the motor-car, and he had to admit that there was grazing on the burnt, and not on the other, veld. The Minister will certainly take no notice of what the member for Ladysmith said. People like Dr. Marloth and others, who have never seen anything of farming, talk about mountain fires and about flowers and plants. It is all very nice, but what are our farmers to do if they do not burn the veld?

I think it is a reproach to South Africa that with our magnificent timber-producing ability, we should import two and a half millions annually.

More.

The hon. member for South Peninsula (Sir Drummond Chaplin) is quite correct with regard to the criticisms of South African timber. The citrus growers are complaining of it. In my district, where citrus is grown largely, it is considered that the best timber to grow is Cupressus Lusitanica, which is light in weight and odourless. I wonder whether the Minister knows whether his department is planting this timber to any extent. It grows to perfection. Citrus production requires an enormous amount of timber, and we should keep that money in the country. There is no reason why we should not grow our own box timber here, and prevent. Our money going out of the country. The growers of wattle forests in my division appreciate very highly the work done by officers of the Agricultural Department who were sent by the Minister. The official in charge, Dr. Ripley, of the investigations into the insect pest attacking the wattle trees has been very successful. The wattle industry to-day is second in value to the mealie industry, but there is one trouble ahead. When successive crops of wattle are grown on the same soil, there is a diminution in the yield, and the trees are more easily attacked by disease. The difficulty may be overcome by soil inoculation, but the matter must be inquired into by an expert, and the industry is willing to assist in co-operating with the department.

The hon. member for Riversdale (Mr. Badenhorst) made an absolutely impossible speech. It is actually unnecessary to reply to him, because he has already said that he does not agree with himself. In any case, I hope that the Minister will take no notice of him. I think all of us who know anything about irrigation at the foot of mountains know what the value of water is, and how much it decreases in consequence of mountain fires. The farmers in the south-western districts who are dependent on the water from the Zwart and Langberg know it only too well. I want to suggest to the hon. member for Riversdale to advise his farmers to employ the plough a little more, and the match less. Then they will farm more successfully with sheep. I want to support the hon. member for Ladismith (Mr. J. J. M. van Zyl), and to ask the Government if it cannot bring about, in addition to what the hon. member recommended, co-operation between the Department of Justice and the Forestry Department to put out mountain fires. I think it will be a good scheme to get the assistance of the police. Further, mountain clubs may possibly be established, possibly under the protection of farmers’ associations, and the Minister may possibly grant a small subsidy to such clubs. They can then work in cooperation with the police in putting out mountain fires. If such measures are taken, we shall put an end to these continual mountain fires. We in the south-west know the damage caused by mountain fires, and shall be thankful to the Minister if he takes measures to stop them.

I support the request of the hon. member for South Peninsula (Sir Drummond Chaplin) asking for information regarding the suitability of wood being grown for the purposes of this country. I had an opportunity of visiting a plantation where pines and blue gums were being grown, and I wondered what use the wood could be put to. It would be interesting if the Minister could enlighten us as to the uses to which these woods would best be utilized. If we grow wood suitable for the making of boxes for fruit pocking and other purposes, we should save the large amount of money which now goes out of the country every year in payment of imported packing material.

One must be struck by the number of mountain fires in the Western Province, and especially round Cape Town. Recently the lower slopes of Lion’s Head and Table Mountain have been burned out in a manner I do not remember in my 30 years’ knowledge of the Cape Peninsula. I do not know whether the land above Camps Bay and on the Lion’s Head are vested in the Crown or Cape Town municipality, but many large tracts of that ground which used to be covered with bush are now as bare as the back of one’s hand, and have been deeply scarred by rains. Cannot something be done to plant these bare places? Some of the most beautiful spots in the Western Province are being destroyed by bush fires, which seem to be becoming worse and worse every year. Can the Minister give us any information regarding the ravages of the snout beetle amongst the eucalyptus plantations in the Transvaal? What is the present position?

We are not only voting £186,000 for afforestation, but the railways and harbours department will spend £45,000 on trees for sleeper purposes, so that the total vote really is not very far short of £250,000. I regret that we have no information as to the amount of loan money which is to be devoted to forestry this year. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to what I conceive to be a most urgent problem—the provision of wood for packing cases for fruit. In the next few years we are likely to be faced with an enormous production of citrus fruit alone. At the end of 1925 we had 2,650,000 citrus trees, and they are increasing at the rate of 500 per cent. in five years. It is obvious that in a very few years we shall have many millions of citrus trees, and it is considered that in seven years the average production of each tree should be at least one box of fruit. Hence in a few years we shall be faced with a big problem to provide packing cases for the fruit. The margin of profit on the export of fruit is becoming smaller every year. Sometimes the margin is on the wrong side, and that is all the more reason for reducing the cost of packing. I know of no better way of doing this than to grow our own packing material. Is the forestry department fully alive to this, and what varieties of trees does it grow to meet the demands? I am informed that several varieties of trees will produce in about six years wood suitable for box packing, and that in the meantime a good revenue could be obtained from the sale of thinnings. In addition to the citrus exports there are the deciduous exports, so that there will be no lack of demand for box making material from our fruit growing industry. We can get our railway sleepers from Australia, and perhaps later on from the Argentine, but the provision of cheap wood for the fruit growers would benefit the small man very greatly indeed, and would enable many people who have sunk their fortunes in citrus plantations, to look forward to obtaining a margin of profit.

The hon. member for Oudtshoorn (Mr. le Roux) attacks me and says that I should advise the farmers in my constituency about mountain fires. The hon. member can teach me about ostriches but not about merino sheep farming. About merino sheep he knows about as much as a black crow about religion. He is still very young to teach us how to farm with merino sheep. It is no use giving them water and for them to die from scarcity of food. If the hon. member comes and makes that speech in my constituency then the same thing will happen to him as in the case of that expert of the Minister who made speeches there.

I want to know if we can get a little more assistance from the Forestry Department than we are doing with regard to advice given to private persons with reference to forestry. Only a comparatively few private people go in for forestry, and those who do usually plant the wrong type of tree. From Elliot up to Maclear, and on to Matatiele we have a belt of land very suited for the planting. Some years ago a number of farmers acting on the advice of the Forestry Department planted considerable numbers of trees, mostly pines, varieties which in Maclear have proved rather a failure, the Forestry Department now tells us that evidently these were not the right kind of tree for that area, and this is where I think the department might be of assistance in putting us on the right lines from the start. I do not wish to criticise the Forestry Department or to be in any way unfriendly towards it because I have a great respect for the department. I have had seeds from them at different times in order to conduct experiments, but unfortunately with poor results. It is disappointing to people to take the trouble to put down plantations and then after ten or 15 years to find the trees are unsuitable. We import an enormous quantity of timber into this country, whereas we should be exporters. There are areas in the Transvaal where I was very much struck with the quality of the timber grown, and which I think could be developed to great advantage. We have a potential asset in the country that would bring in tremendous returns, and not only that, but it is also a suitable field for the employment of poor whites. It is work that would be reproductive and more beneficial to the country than the unskilled spade work to which they are put on the railways.

I should like to support the hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.- Gen. Byron) in connection with his remarks on the whole question of our requirements of wood in South Africa. I want to ask the Minister if it is not possible to have a table prepared showing what our requirements for 25 and 50 years will be. In 1921 we had 19,000,000 and in 1924 35,000,000 cubic feet of wood. I showed last night in connection with our fruit export that according to the returns of the Agricultural Department we have at present 20,000,000 bearing and non-bearing fruit trees in South Africa. When one remembers what this means in fruit boxes alone without considering the requirements for building material and hardwood for other purposes, anyone, who thinks for a moment, will clearly appreciate that in 25 and in 50 years we shall have a very large shortage of wood. From 1921 to 1924 our requirements of imported wood nearly doubled, and it is very clear that the need in future will be still greater. By the table to be prepared the planting of trees can be regulated. It is often said that the methods we employ in planting forests, viz., white labour, make the work unpayable, and I must honestly say that the method—apart from labour—which has been followed during the past two years is not calculated to make a success of things. There is a case in my constituency of which I have personal knowledge which I may mention. If the wrong kind of ground is bought then it cannot be expected to plant trees on business lines, whether yellow, black or white labour is used. If the ground is unsuitable then afforestation will never be a payable proposition. One-third of the ground in the case I refer to is unsuited for the planting of trees on a payable basis because it cannot be ploughed but has to be picked over. If moreover a method is to be employed where the workmen—white labourers—have to walk five or six miles from their camp to their work then I say it is a dissipation of human energy which is quite unjustifiable. It cannot be expected that a man who has to go to and fro so far will have any energy left to do his work properly. I go further. The Minister knows that I mentioned to him personally that when ground is bought for afforestation it must not be done piecemeal. There ought rather to be a big policy of afforestation. The money spent on a large national scheme will be well spent because it will be productive. A policy must be prepared in accordance with the growth of the trees because there are some which become fit for cutting after 25, some after 50, and some even after 100 years. If afforestation is spread throughout the Union on a small scale on small pieces of ground it will never pay, because the costs of administration will be too high. The planting should be concentrated.

I would like to ask the Minister a question in connection with the fires which occur round the mountains whether anything has been done to help to prevent a reoccurrence of these fires. Enormous damage is done to these plantations, many of them belonging to the Government. I know many interests are involved, and an answer has been given before that much depends upon co-operation between the private interests. We see a constant repetition of these destructive fires, and I am sure the department would be glad, and the Minister would be glad, to do all they can to take the strongest steps necessary to secure a prevention of the repetition of these occurrences. Probably one of the difficulties of the situation is that while it is difficult to catch the people responsible for starting these fires, when they are caught they unfortunately get away with light fines which are imposed by the magistrates. In cases where you have such a temptation to set these woods on fire, I wish the magistrates would realise that it is their duty to impose stringent fines. Now there is another item concerning the assistant kiln operator. I would like to know how these kiln drying operations are going on. I know a great deal can be done in the direction of railway sleepers, but take our stinkwood furniture. It is probably one of the best woods in the world for furniture, but no matter how well seasoned it is, we find, no matter how some of us try to encourage colonial manufacture by getting this furniture from George, that when it goes to dry climates the best seasoned stinkwood is often unable to resist the climate. It is beautiful wood. I would like to support those speakers who have pressed on the Minister to take a long view in the preparation of areas for afforestation. The production of wood in this world amounts to 66 billion cubic feet per annum, and the annual growth is only 38 billion. That shows that, as a matter of fact, we are outrunning the constable in the world by about two to one in regard to our wood. Every nation in the world has a duty cast upon it to see that the deficiency is met. We know that some nations have been cutting out all their forestry assets and using them up without any re-planting. There was a rule in the old Dutch days that every man who cut down a tree ought to be made to plant two. I think that was a very sound rule. If you look round the Peninsula, you see what we owe to the far-seeing vision of the old governors, Simon van der Stel and others. There are places all over the country where an enormous amount of afforestation could be done. On a recent visit to the George and Knysna district I was delighted to find the number of private plantations that there were on that road. I think that our forests could be developed in two directions. The one is by the Government giving every possible encouragement to the private grower, by giving him, if necessary, free trees and by giving him, if necessary, a bonus on the production or the successful growth of trees. It would pay the State to do that. Then I would like to see the Minister take his courage in his hands. A few years ago a very long step was taken when schemes involving in the ultimate result very large sums of money were proposed. Now these appear year by year on the estimates, but I think we should encourage the Minister to realise that a far-sighted scheme, looking forward twenty, thirty, fifty years or more, is a scheme that will pay the Government handsomely. I think that if the Minister were to have a forestry survey made of the whole country and he were to bring forward a long-headed and far-sighted scheme, looking many years in advance, he would have the House behind him and the country behind him, and every man who sees what it would mean to the ultimate good of the country to have an asset of that kind developing and developing against the day when we may find ourselves owing to the world shortage of timber in a Very bad way indeed.

I do not rise to criticise the Minister, but because I consider afforestation a very important matter, and I agree with every word the hon. member for Barberton (Mr. Rood) has said. I also agree with the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close), but not with his desire that the Government should give more prizes for that kind of thing to private people. I feel that the Government should do more afforestation. It is strange that I should ask the Government to spend more, seeing it has already spent so much. On this vote, however, there is only an increase of about £4,000 for afforestation, and it is more or less for officials. The Minister of Lands will be able to tell us later how much ground has been bought for afforestation. It is quite true as the hon. member for Barbarton said, that trees are sometimes planted where they will not grow, and the Government must very carefully consider where to plant trees. I do not want to be provincial, but it seems to me that in many places in the Transvaal nothing is being done in afforestation. I notice that in the Cape Province even the mountains and rocks are being planted.

The trees thrive well there.

But it takes many years, while in the Transvaal there are areas with a good rainfall and very good ground where the trees will grow much quicker. I know the Minister is limited in his schemes, but he must knock a little at the door of the Minister of Lands, and not be too cheeseparing with regard to afforestation. If there is anything out of which the State will reimburse itself in future, then it is afforestation. We notice from the returns that there is a great shortage in wood, and that it will last for years. We see at the agricultural shows beautiful kinds of wood that we have, and we see what the Government is doing in that connection, but there is room for a great deal more. There is also a chance of helping the unemployed. One hears so much about schemes to occupy the unemployed. This is the place. The hon. member for Barberton explained everything so clearly that I do not want to say much more, but I think we cannot urge earnestly enough the obtaining of ground for afforestation on a large scale. Afforestation by private persons has been mentioned, but it seems to me that people nowadays are not as energetic as the old people in the old days. They do not plant nearly so many trees. I do not know the cause, but the old people were much more enthusiastic in this connection, and to-day it hardly ever occurs that people plant half of their farms with trees. I think it will be a good thing if the farmers’ representatives will urge their constituents to plant trees. Don’t let everything be done by the Government. The hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) said that small trees should be supplied to private individuals. I agree that the trees should be sold as cheaply as possible, but we must not spoil the people too much.

I do not think the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) and the hon. member who has just spoken know what is actually being spent on plantations at the present moment. The Government is spending £200,000, and the Railway Department £40,000 out of loan funds, which practically makes a quarter of a million.

And £200,000 from revenue funds.

Yes, and then there is what we are spending out of general revenue of the country. There is no question, to my mind, that far more is being spent by private landowners than was the case some years ago. I know of two plantations within 50 miles of Cape Town, one of a million trees put in by a private owner, and the other of half a million trees also put in by a private owner. The department supplies the young trees very cheaply and I think this is a very practical way of assistance. Perhaps the Government might add to that by advising landowners who want to plant trees as to the suitability of the soil. Mistakes are made from time to time; there is no question about it, and that might be avoided. There is one point I want to ask the Minister about. It is getting on towards the end of May, and we have not yet got his report for last year on the Forestry Department. My hon. friend ought to put a little dynamite under some of these officials. There is universal complaint about these delays. My hon. friend must see the tremendous interest taken in this forestry business, and yet we have not got adequate information. I think Ministers generally should certainly see that their reports are placed on the Table much earlier than they are at present. This is not the only department at fault in this respect by any means. Then I want to speak very strongly about these fires. Here we have fires on Table Mountain. I can never see any prosecution or any punishment meted out. I think the punishment ought to be made very much more severe than it is at present. It is heart-breaking to see these enormous fires which we have round Table Mountain, and something certainly ought to be done. I support the suggestion of the hon. member for Ladismith (Mr. J. J. M. van Zyl) in the way of teaching school children the evil effects of these fires. Then there are the fires made by landowners to clear the bush away. Surely it is time something was done to teach the landowner the evil effects that come from this. We ought to treat these fires much more seriously than we do at present. Take the Cape Flats. There have been tremendous fires there recently, and I should say started quite wilfully for the purpose of getting dry wood, because you see cartloads of wood being taken away and sold retail in Cape Town and the suburbs. I wish the Minister would take up this thing in earnest. I had a fire on my own place some time ago. I got the police and I offered a reward, jointly with my neighbour, of £50. We have not been able to get at the culprit, unfortunately.

What is the remedy for that?

We will have to continue offering a reward until these men are caught, but it is no use when they are let off with a mere fine. It ought to be imprisonment at least for men who start fires on the veld. [Time limit.]

I would like the Minister, when he replies, to give us some information about the preservation of timber for sleepers. The Western Australian Government, when I was over there, had made a special department and were using an arsenic solution which they found the most efficacious way of preserving timber. We have millions of eucalyptus trees from which, in the near future, we hope to supply ourselves with railway sleepers. The amount spent last year on sleepers was £302,000, and the year before it was £381,000. In addition to that, the railways use for fencing and bridges £32,000 value in timber. A lot of that I think might be locally grown. If we can preserve our sleepers to last half the life of the Australian sleepers there will be no need for members of Parliament to go over to the Argentine to make sleeper contracts.

I want to support the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) (Mr. Geldenhuys) in his reference to the Transvaal not getting its proportionate share of the expenditure on afforestation. If we look at the estimates we see that the Transvaal and the Free State only get one-fourth of the money spent.

Must I plant trees in the Free State?

The Minister will admit that there could be much development in his constituency and in mine with reference to afforestation.

The Free State has always been behind, for years.

The Minister told me last year, or the year before, that he would enquire if an improvement could not be made. We think that there is a very good chance of extending afforestation on the eastern side of the Drakensberg, and the Minister will do well to investigate the matter. But I want to differ from the remark of the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) in connection with what the old people did. When we travel through the Transvaal now we find that afforestation has gone ahead with tremendous strides. What the foresters in my part of the Transvaal feel and what I object to is that they do not get sufficient advice. The advice that the department gave fifteen years ago got us into great difficulty, because it was to the effect of planting the trees too close together, so that our forests to-day are quite useless. Moreover, certain kinds of trees were recommended which are almost useless and unfit for use. I hope the Minister will see that we get information, not only from the department in Pretoria, but from the various stations in the country about the kind of trees. I can assure the Minister that many of us do not know what kind of trees should be planted in the forests in the Transvaal.

The hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) made a suggestion, but I would suggest a method which has been adopted in Natal. A few years ago some public spirited men donated a sum of money to the Natal Agricultural Union and offered prizes for the best plantations. Natal was divided for this purpose into three districts—the high veld, 4,000 feet and higher; the middle veld, from 2,000 to 4,000 feet elevation, and the coast belt, under 2,000 feet. The first prize is £40, the second £20, and the third £10. These prizes are awarded at the end of five years for the best plantation in each area. After about ten years the scheme has become almost self-supporting, because a charge of £1 is made as an entry fee. There are about 80 to 90 entries each year. For the first four years there is no expenditure at all. The restriction is that what is grown must be timber. Such a scheme will induce much competition amongst the farmers.

I would like to ask the Minister what is the explanation of these votes. On page 154, A. 13, it is stated—

There is no amount opposite to them in regard to any expenditure. Why is it left vacant? Surely these people receive some wages

I should like to know from the Minister how many white families are still engaged on afforestation work? I understand that certain persons, as money is available, are put on the settlements. Are the places of these latter filled up again? I want to urge the Minister to listen to the appeal of the hon. member for Ladismith. We all agree that veld fires do endless harm, because much yeld is ruined in that way. It is something which is quite out of date, and I hope the Minister will not take any notice of what the hon. member for Riversdale (Mr. Badenhorst) said.

I quite agree with hon. members that it is a very serious position that we imported such a large quantity of wood last year—over £3,000,000 worth. But, unfortunately, the trees that are being planted will have to be there a long time before they mature. It will take from 50 to 70 years for some kinds of trees to mature, and it is no use cutting them down before they have matured. We have had some complaints this evening of some kinds of wood being used which are no good. The only wood sold by the department is that from the thinning-out of bush. It is not mature wood. If hon. members will just have patience and wait—I cannot make things grow more quickly. I am as anxious as hon. members on the other side that we should be in a position to supply our own wood in South Africa, and not have to import from other countries. I quite agree that our climate in certain parts of the country is exceptionally good for the growth of trees, and, therefore, we are growing more trees in these particular parts than in other parts which are not so suitable. The question has been raised by several speakers who complained that the wood used for fruit boxes is no good. But a certain pinewood is grown which has no smell, and is exceptionally good for making these boxes. We are going in largely for the planting of this wood. Growers feel that because the wood is not white, it is no good for boxwood. My department has gone fully into the question, and I am assured that some of the wood we are growing is suitable for box-making purposes. The hon. member for Umvoti (Mr. Deane) will be interested to know the cupreous lusitanica suitable for boxes, and grows very well in Natal. We are planting it on a fairly large scale. My department advises me that we are growing all the woods suitable for raising in South Africa, but it is impossible to utilize the trees yet, as they are not matured. Hon. members are asking that the Government should formulate a tree-planting programme. Well, as far back as 1919, a blue book—U.G. 21 of 1919 —was published, giving details of the programme for the next 40 or 50 years. It is absolutely useless Government publishing blue books if eight years later hon. members complain that no programme has been outlined.

It was not a complaint.

It is useless to publish blue books unless they are read. Then it has been complained that the Transvaal is not receiving its share of tree-planting activity, and it is said that we should plant as many trees in the Transvaal as we do in the Cape. I think the Transvaal has got more than its share this year, for we planted 4,880 acres against 15,000 all over the Union. In this respect I think the Transvaal had more than its full share. The hon. member for South Peninsula (Sir Drummond Chaplin) raised some very important questions. One was with reference to tree-planting by white labour. That, however, was the policy laid down by the previous Government in order to give employment whites. I quite realise that we are paying Europeans 6s. 4d. a day when we could get natives to do the work for about 2s. a day, but does the hon. member suggest that we should send the white workers away? I don’t think the House would agree to that. The cost of tree-planting in some places is increased by the fact that we have to erect housing accommodation for the workers, and also to plant on the mountains. My department says the best trees grow on the mountain veld. We plant as much box wood as we possibly can, and our experts inform me that we are planting the right variety. An official is investigating the difficulties of wattle growing in Natal. I agree that we ought to grow all our own woods, and we propose planting about 15,000 acres a year.

What about seasoning the timber?

We have a kiln at Pretoria doing this on a small scale, but I am buying a piece of land at Pretoria on which we can erect a proper timber seasoning plant. I have replied to the question about boxes. The hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell) and other hon. members have complained about mountain fires. Hon. members know how difficult it is to catch hold of these people. Not long ago one of the Government forests was set on fire in Cape Town in broad daylight and twenty morgen were destroyed, and we could not catch the people. The law is there I know, and hon. members complain that the magistrates give such lenient sentences, but we do not want to interfere with the Bench. It is one of those things we must leave to the judges and the magistrates. The hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.-Gen. Byron) asked about the different varieties of wood. Well, I can only be guided by the experts, and they would give the advice to the farmers. The hon. member for Aliwal (Mr. Sephton) has complained that the advice was bad. I am sorry the trees planted in his area died. The hon. member for Ermelo (Col.-Cdt. Collins) has complained that trees are planted too thick. I understand that they do plant trees thickly and then thin them out later. If the hon. member will advise the farmers to thin out their plantations, I do not think they will find the advice of the department is wrong. The hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) wants the Government to give free trees to farmers. I do not know whether the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) will agree with that, but if the hon. member’s party propose to issue free trees, and are willing to pay the taxes, we will consider it. We are selling trees at cost price— 5s. a hundred—so members cannot complain. About the drying process, we are erecting one in Pretoria shortly. The scheme for the future I have explained. The hon. member for Cradock (Mr. G. C. van Heerden) asked how many white men we have still on the plantations. The answer is between 800 and 900 families. Occasionally some are taken by the Minister of Labour to settle on farms and their places are taken by others.

†*The hon. member for Ladismith (Mr. J. J. M. van Zyl) spoke about bush fires. I have already said how difficult it is to catch the offenders. I want, in addition, to tell him that there is legislation. He wishes that our mountains in certain parts of the country should not be leased. What will happen if a dry year comes? What will then become of the farming? We prohibit mountain fires, and we hope the time will come that the veld will be good enough so that there will be no more need for mountain fires. One thing is, however, certain—that one cannot farm sheep on spiky grass. I do not think that it will do any good to teach the children about it. The people all know the law. The hon. member for Barberton (Mr. Rood) pointed out the desirability of the forests adjoining each other. That is so, but it is often coupled with great difficulties and expense. The Government last year bought an additional 5,000 morgen for £10,000, and attempts are being made to get hold of as much ground as possible. In relation to afforestation, I have already said what the programme is for the 40 years from 1919. Then the hon. member objected because some people have to walk five to seven miles to the forests. We cannot, surely, remove the village. If hon. members want to use white labour for afforestation, then it must be seen to that the expenditure does not become still greater. We arrange for the people to sleep at the plantations, and that they therefore need not return, but most of them prefer to go to the village and to walk to the plantations the next morning. If hon. members think that that is not desirable, then we must do away with white labour there.

My argument was that human energy was being wasted too much. If there were one or two motor lorries, the people could be transported.

We cannot increase the costs. I do not see how we can decide on buying motor lorries. The fact of we using white labour for afforestation means that we probably spend £75,000 more per annum than if we did it in a different way, but I think that everyone in the House is in favour to continue working in the present way.

†The hon. member for Durban (Berea) (Mr. Henderson) has asked me the meaning of “part-time rangers.” Part-time rangers are people who are living near the plantations, and we employ them as part-time officers to look after those forests, so that we need not employ a permanent man there.

Do they not get any wages?

Oh, yes. They only get part-time wages.

The figures are not stated in the estimates here.

Yes, it is under “wages and allowances.” I have asked the chief forester about this, and he explained the position to me.

I would like to ask the Minister one question. He was mentioning the question of white labour on forests. I think the criticism is not that you use white labour on these forest settlements, but that you spend more money in laying down your forests with white labour, and instead of debiting that excess cost to revenue, you unduly load the loan vote. For instance, if you refer to the last report of the Auditor-General, you will see that he estimates that £61,000 has been added to the loan vote for the extra cost of using white labour. I think the criticism is this, that that money should be taken out of revenue. The view rather is that it is not very heroic for us to allow our children to pay for the troubles of to-day. We are not paying to-day what this is costing, but we are simply leaving it for posterity to pay for it. The Minister knows that if you take the cost of laying down railway sleeper plantations, they only run out at £17 8s. 2d. per acre, whereas the general plantations cost anything from £21 to £26 per acre. I understand one reason of that is that there is more native and coloured labour used on the railway plantations than there is in the other cases. The criticism really is that we should pay for it to-day, and not leave it to posterity to pay for, and that it is not fair to these plantations to load them with this increased cost. Afterwards, when we come to utilize the timber, we shall find it more expensive, compared with other countries where they lay down their plantations cheaper. We might arrive at the position that we cannot compete in the market against imported timber, even when our timber is grown. You ought to pay for it out of the revenue vote.

May I point out that although we are loading the loan vote with this amount, it is to supply work for poor whites, but we are getting that money back; our children will not have to pay for it. The revenue from these forests in future years will pay for all the money laid out, plus a surplus to pay our other debts. I think the previous Government looked at it in the same light. As far as I am concerned, I should be only too glad if we arrived at the day when the Minister of Labour took these men off my hands. We had over 1,000 of these men, but, on account of one afforestation being completed, they were taken away and sent to farms by the Department of Labour. In time I hope I will be in a position to reduce that expenditure, but unfortunately, to-day we are not in a position to do so. I agree we are paying more, but we cannot pay out of revenue. It has always been done like that. I do not think it will come on our children, because the wood will pay for itself. With regard to the other point, the forestry department is planting trees on behalf of the railway department. However, if the Treasury is in a position to say “Let us do it all from revenue,” I will not raise any objection.

I think it would be interesting for the committee to know how these wasp colonies are getting on. Even in a district like Stellenbosch we are beginning to feel the ravages of the snout beetle. We noticed in Australia that the snout beetle was no danger in that country, which is the home of the eucalyptus tree, in any way whatever. I know that during that time Mr. Tuke, one of the officers of the Agricultural Department, was making investigations, and I believe he sent over an insect of the wasp type, and I would like to ask how these colonies are getting on over here. I see there is doubt about these colonies surviving, especially up on the high veld in the cold weather. I would like to know whether there are any down here, and if the department could supply farmers with small colonies and try and check the ravages of the beetle in the south-western districts. My hon. friend might tell us what are the latest reports, and whether this entomologist has made any further investigations in Australia.

I have already explained that last year we sent an entomologist to Australia, and after only six weeks there he discovered an enemy of the snout beetle. They have sent us some of these insects, which have done very well in the summer. They have been put in several of the afforestation areas, and they are killing the eggs of the snout beetle, according to what has been reported to me. We shall have to see what happens in the winter. If next year it proves a success, I hope to give these insects to private growers as well.

I am sure we all appreciate the reasonable manner in which the Minister is now replying to our enquiries. With regard to the timber seasoning and investigating officer whose salary is on the estimates, I should like to ask if this is the same officer who was lent by the Government to Kenya for the purpose of advising upon timber seasoning in that colony? Under what arrangements was this officer sent, and is it possible to get a copy of his report? In my own constituency we have a very successful settlement of tree-planting in which a number of unemployed are being utilized in the establishment of plantations. These men are doing very good work, and they earn good wages at the Weza settlement. I should like the Minister to let us know whether he intends to continue the plantation in that locality. There is a report that he is buying land some distance away from that settlement for the purpose of establishing a separate one there. That seems to be a mistake, because it will make it more difficult to supervise the work done at Weza at the present moment. I hope the Minister will consider the desirability of not dividing the work, but concentrating as far as possible and continuing the plantation at Weza outward. I support the proposal of the hon. member for Natal Coast (Brig.-Gen. Arnott) that the Minister should consider the desirability of encouraging afforestation by the offer of prizes for the growing of trees. This system has resulted in the establishment of some of the most satisfactory plantations in the whole of Natal, and has led to a very large area being covered with valuable trees. I congratulate the forestry officers responsible for the extension of small plantations in the Transvaal and the way in which farmers have been encouraged to plant trees around their homesteads. During my last visit to Northern Swaziland I was very much impressed by the homestead plantations in the region between Ermelo and Swaziland, which have transferred the bare veldt of 20 years ago to a beautiful part of the country.

I do not think any of us question that the department is doing excellent work, but one is struck by the general bareness of the country, which is like a face without eyebrows. Much has been done privately to improve the appearance of the countryside by tree planting. For instance, the Standerton district, which used to be bare and bleak, is now beautiful as the result of tree planting. The Railway Department, in conjunction with the Forestry Department, should plant trees along every railway line.

What about the view?

I love views, but I want to see the whole country looking better. If we had trees on one side of the line only the view from the other side would be unobstructed. I am sure the gangers would enter into the spirit of the thing, and this would be an excellent way to show the farmers what trees would be most suitable for their locality. There are already fire belts burnt annually and fences along both sides of the lines which would prevent stock damaging the trees. I agree that a great deal more should be done, though I do not agree with what the hon. member for Johannesburg (North) (Mr. Geldenhuys) said about old people planting more trees than the younger generation. I know of one old” farmer who planted a willow pole and it grew and he was very much annoyed because he meant it for a gate post and not a tree! I agree with regard to prevention of mountain fires that it is difficult to know what to do, but propaganda should be undertaken to get magistrates to understand that something must be done. Some of these fires are started by flower pickers in order to clear areas for wild flowers. Some species of plants are extinct to-day on account of this ruthless destruction. Others also do it with the object of getting the dead wood for sale. The river I live on is much less permanent in flow to-day, not so much because of a shortage of rain but on account of the mountain fires, and the rapid run off and drying of springs. These fires are not purely accidental. They are deliberately started and it is difficult to get the people responsible. One day I saw three fires start within a few minutes between Tokai and Wynberg, and I do not believe it was coincidence. Mountain burning and very often even veld burning are far more harmful than the value obtained for the little bit of extra grazing you get. Even in the Transvaal if grass is burnt at proper seasons and under proper control it is much better than just indiscriminately setting fire to the veld and letting it burn as is done at times. Sometimes a fire thus started extends over very many miles. We ought to try to devise some means to stop this wanton destruction of mountain vegetations. My chief point, however, now is to get the railways to be used as window dressing propaganda for tree planting throughout the country. Mention was made of trees in the krantzes. We remember Mr. Hutcheon who was chief conservator and a very keen enthusiast and who used to go up Table Mountain with a quantity of pine seeds and throw them over the krantzes with wonderful results.

The Minister’s change of heart has been so marked to-day and been so much appreciated by the House, that it seems almost a pity to criticise. The Minister would persist in treating suggestions made on this side of the House and even on his own side, as complaints. Now the suggestions which were made were not complaints. The Minister must have realised from the debate to-night that a far keener interest is taken in afforestation to-day than was the case twenty years ago. When some of us ventured to speak about developing progressive plans for afforestation, we were perfectly well aware that eight or ten years ago a very large scheme was adopted and a very big step taken forward in the plans of afforestation. We recognize that in the Forestry Department we have got a most efficient department under a most efficient head, but it is to support this kind of progressive people that some of us have been speaking tonight and urging the Minister to take stock now and see whether the time has not arrived when he can make much bigger developments for the future. There is one further thing I want to refer to, and that is in connection with the various fires, especially round about here. I quite agree with those who say that a considerable portion of the fires round here are caused by people who want to get firewood and also by people who want to get flowers, but I think there is one thing that has to be done, and that is to educate the people to a sense of their own duty in the matter, because I believe that a large number of these fires are due not so much to wanton acts, as to the carelessness of people who throw cigarette ends about. I believe that is probably one of the most fertile sources of the burnings that take place from time to time. You can only cure that by getting the people to realise that there is a duty upon them to be very careful in these matters.

Earlier in the evening when speaking I forgot to ask the Minister for some information about the Weza plantation between Harding and Kokstad. I visited that plantation about two years ago, and was very much struck with the whole scheme. There were houses for about 100 families or more, separate cottages, and men were employed on this settlement and receiving a minimum of 6s. 4d. a day, but it was possible for a man to earn £18 a month by doing piece work. I would like to have some information in regard to the success or otherwise of that scheme. The whole idea is an excellent one. It gives employment to poor whites. At the time I visited the place I understood men were constantly leaving, I would like to know whether the settlement is a success or not.

There is just one point I would like to be clear upon. Did the Minister say it was his intention to gradually eliminate the poor whites from afforestation? I would like to know if that is what he meant. If that were to take place I think it would be a great mistake, because undoubtedly forestry has been a splendid avenue of employment for these people, and it has also uplifted some of these people. In many cases these people have made something, and they have been able to get pieces of ground of their own. I think it would be a splendid idea to continue this policy, which has been a great success in the past. It is not a question of relief work, it is a matter of productive labour, and it is one of the best ways in which we can solve our unemployment difficulties in this country.

There is one point I would like to put to the Minister, with reference to the question of forest fires. I was in the States last year, and the danger there of forest fires is very great. A special day is set apart right throughout the States and Canada when attention is drawn in the schools and in all public places to the dangers from fire. Pictures are displayed and demonstrations made and the figures showing the losses by fire are shown. The papers make a great feature of this. I put this suggestion to the Minister and he might perhaps pass it on to his colleague, the Minister of Education, for use in the schools.

The Minister has spoken of working to a programme, but I would like him to make it clear whether that programme is calculated to render South Africa completely independent as far as the timber supply is concerned.

That is the intention.

Because I understand we have planted so far about 150,000 acres and we are aiming at 300,000 acres. I do not know whether we are all aware of the serious position with which the world is faced, of a shortage of timber in the near future. It is so serious that an Empire forestry conference was called in Canada in 1923. It adopted a resolution which, I think, we should all understand. It was to the effect that in view of the great and increasing drain on the soft wood forests of the world, it was incumbent on every part of the Empire to conserve and augment its own resources. Of the forest resources of the world, there are only three countries, Sweden, England and Montenegro that are increasing their timber resources. In Canada, unless there is a considerable increase in planting, there are only 25 years’ timber in sight. The U.S.A. is in the same position. It cannot supply its own timber. Practically the whole of its wood pulp is drawn from Canada. In a few years we must face the position that we are not going to get imported timber or the price will be higher.

We cannot make the trees grow more quickly.

We want to know what the programme is. Perhaps the Minister can say whether I am right and that we are finally aiming at 300,000 acres. Then there is the cost. I believe that the cost per acre for establishing plantations with native labour is £12 10s. At the annual meeting of the Transvaal Mining and Development Company in Lydenburg in September, 1924, the chairman made a very lucid statement of the result of the operations of that company, which has gone very largely for tree planting; and the cost of establishing plantations was only £4 per acre, or slightly under that. I do not think that includes the cost of the land. There seems a remarkable difference between this and the cost to the state. I suggest that the Minister should go into that. I want to associate myself with what has been said or that where there is a forest settlement where European labour is used we are absolutely justified in permitting an increased expenditure and I hope the Minister will continue that policy, because it will have the support of practically every man in the country. You are giving these men a chance to establish themselves, and you are giving them a home. You are doing what I think you should aim at in this country—you are establishing a forest population. In Europe you have a race of foresters whose ancestors have worked in forests and who have a forest sense. If this policy is continued and carried out we can look forward to a similar class of people in this country, and we will have a big opening for our surplus population. I want to endorse what the hon. member for Durban (Stamford Hill) (Mr. Lennox) says. I know the settlement very well to which he referred.

We are planting trees with white labour, and I have explained over and over again that through our white labour policy we are paying more than double what we should do if we employed native labour. However, both sides of the House agree that we must go in for a white labour policy.

I agree with that too.

If we continue that policy we cannot do it better than we are doing it now, but it is more expensive. For one thing we have to build houses, and now they want me to give more facilities which will still further increase the cost. I am resisting that, but whether I shall be able to continue to resist it I do not know. We are fully alive to the needs of the future. I have already explained about forest fires. It would certainly be a good thing if we could teach children the danger of lighting fires in the forests. Some of the men employed on the Weza plantation make as much as £15 per month on piecework, but piecework is cheaper for the Government than day work. The hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) wants us to embark on a very much bigger tree planting programme. Well, don’t let us run too fast. We shall have our hands full enough in carrying out the present scheme. The Kenya Government paid all the expenses of the Union expert who visited Kenya. The hon. member for Albany (Mr. Struben) wants the Railway Department to plant trees along the railway lines. We cannot at present protect our afforestation against fire, and with trees along thousands of miles of railways, how can we protect them from fire? However I will discuss it with the Minister of Railways.