as chairman, brought up the second report of the Select Committee on Crown Lands.

Report to be considered in Committee on 31st May.

Can the Minister reply to the query I put to him the other day with regard to broadcasting?

I understand the post office accommodation at Johannesburg is totally inadequate for the traffic. The sale of! stamps and other conveniences is very much prejudiced owing to the want of accommodation, and that for the officials is very poor. Perhaps the Minister can consider the advisability of getting us a new post office at Johannesburg.

We are much indebted to the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs for the way in which he has assisted our farming population with telephone lines all over the country, and I wish also to thank the postmaster-general for what he has done. There are, however, still various lines which ought to be built in my constituency, and I want to ask for an extension of a telephone line from Maramane to Oliphantshoek from Struggle via Bret by to Khosis, from Sutton to Dikatlong via Lower Dikatlong and new lines from there to Kuruman; also for lines from Kuruman to Dingle and from Oliphantshoek to Gamagana. The Minister has been terribly attacked about the charge of 1s. per hour for unskilled labour in the towns, and the hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel) attributed the unemployment in Cape Town to it. It, however, has nothing to do with that and one of the leaders of the South African party (Dr. Abdurahman) said—as reported in the “Cape Times”—that the unemployment was due to the coming in of natives to these parts, and that the work here ought rather to be given to the people born amongst us. The unemployment is due to that and not to the payment of 1s. an hour for unskilled labour. Further I want to thank the Minister that he has advanced so far—in contradistinction to the South African party—that he has removed the word “white” so that there is also a chance of coloured people being employed in skilled labour.

The Minister told us some time ago that he would cut off our connections if we dare criticize the Telephone Department, and we are rather nervous about the matter. It is not right, however, to pass by any complaint you might have merely to satisfy the Minister, and I wish to draw his attention to a few complaints the public have against the Telephone Department. The Minister looks surprized.

I should think so.

I would ask the Minister to seriously consider the matter raised by the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) the other evening. Members of the Posts and Telegraphs Department were retrenched in 1908 on account of abolition of office, and although they had assisted the Government in regard to the finances of the country they suffered severely as they had only one year of service added for six years’ service. They have suffered in a way no other members of the public service have suffered. In other cases of abolition of office ten years’ service were added. They feel very strongly that the same consideration should be given to them. Why do people who live outside Cape Town proper to whom telegrams are sent after certain hours, have to pay 1s. for delivery of the telegram? In some instances this charge could be avoided if the contents of the telegram were telephoned to the recipient. If it is for the convenience of the Government that the Sea Point telegraph office is closed, Sea Point telegrams should be delivered without any extra charge. I have had many complaints of telegraphic delays. In one case a telegram from Bloemfontein to Cape Town was not delivered under six hours. Again, very often a delay of more than an hour occurs after the receipt of a telegram in Cape Town before it reaches the address of the recipient. Again, it sometimes takes fifteen days to send a parcel from Cape Town to Pretoria. Is the Minister going to carry out the policy of South Africa first? If a registered letter is addressed Alexandria we expect it to be delivered to Alexandria, Cape Province, and not Alexandria, Egypt; yet a parcel of papers sent by registered post and addressed Mr. A. D. van Wyk, P.O. Box 18, Alexandria, was not delivered, and on enquiry it was found that the package had been sent to Alexandria in Egypt. The documents in the parcel were wanted immediately in connection with a mortgage bond, but the postmaster-general declined to cable for the return of the papers from Egypt as the Post Office Act exempted the department from liability. As a result the parties concerned are suffering severely. Again, why should people have to call at the post office for parcels when they are addressed to them at their own homes? Can the Minister tell us what the annual cost is of the gardens around the Union Buildings at Pretoria? The staff includes five gardeners, three temporary gardeners, and I do not know how many besides. I do not mind the expenditure on the Union Buildings if it is reasonable, but it seems to me that we are over-concentrating on the Union Buildings, and are neglecting other parts of South Africa.

You are neglecting Cape Town!

Certainly you are. Even when the hon. member was Minister we neglected Cape Town very sadly. No one objects to reasonable expenditure, but we want to know what the Union gardens cost.

The last speech shows what conveniences people who live in thickly populated areas possess over those who live in the country. I represent a division as big as the Netherlands or Belgium, and quite a number of my constituents would be delighted if they could have their letters or parcels delivered within ten miles of where they live; and yet they are taxpayers just the same as the townspeople are. The present postmaster-general is fully alive to the inconveniences that people who live in the country suffer, and he is desirous of making their existence a little more tolerable. Over 100 farmers in the Ceres and Tulbagh districts have private telephones. It is true they find £3 10s. per mile rather high, and I want the Minister to consider making a reduction in that charge. Some of my constituents subscribe to a party line where they have eight or nine people on the same line, and the yearly subscription comes to £17 or £18 per farmer. That is rather high, and it is necessary to remember that these people are taxpayers. I would like the Minister to take into consideration the construction of a Government line from Laingsburg to Koornplaas. They cannot get a party line because the charges are too high. These people lack the conveniences of the State which we enjoy who live in the towns, and I think they are entitled to benevolent consideration from the Minister. They not only want sympathy, they want the telephone lines. I should like the Minister to consider also a telephone line from Sutherland in the direction of Calvinia to join the line from Calvinia at Middelpost. It is a part of the country which is capable of development which will be aided by cheap telephones. There is one other line I must mention and that is to the Tanqua Valley, between Sutherland and Matjiesfontein. It is a thickly populated valley in winter by farmers who trek there with their stock. A Dutch Reformed Church has been erected in the valley, yet the nearest telegraph office is 30 miles away.

They are very lucky.

No, they are not lucky, because the sheriff or the messenger of the magistrate’s court will go there and charge them more for serving a summons. I hope the Minister will take this into special consideration, because the present postmaster-general is alive to the desirability of meeting these people.

When the estimates were before the House on the last occasion I was dealing with matters connected with staff appointments. The Postal and Telegraph Association has put forward a case and I want hon. members to understand that this criticism is not made in a hostile spirit, but it must be carefully considered.

Don’t apologize.

They consider that their organization has been overlooked, and there are cases where they allege the Minister has not consulted them on matters of promotion and which should have gone before the Promotions Committee. Are these allegations correct or not? They draw attention to a case of ministerial interference with promotions selections in connection with reorganization with the higher posts towards the end of 1926. In this case the Minister announced the selections before they had been considered by the Public Service Commission.

What was the case?

It was in connection with the reorganization of the higher posts in 1926.

But what was the case?

I have not got all the details, but he announced selections before they had been considered by the Public Service Commission, and the association also feels that all these cases of promotion should be considered by the Promotions Committee A paragraph in the “Postal and Telegraph Herald” records that the association’s representatives of the O.F.S. attended the second meeting of the promotions committee, and reported satisfactorily that every endeavour was made to Weigh carefully the merits of all the candidates concerned. The Postal and Telegraph Association is a form of trade union and has a large number of members, and it would be better for the Minister to consult them in every case, and I hope that the Minister will do so in future.

Don’t apologize.

I also wish to refer to the extraordinary delay in announcing the decision of the Cabinet in regard to the case of the post office learners, and I consider a period of two years is far too long. I do not wish to go into the merits of the learners’ case as I understand that a strong deputation of members of this House will wait on the Minister shortly with a view to persuading him to reconsider the decision. I also wish to deal with one or two matters connected with the engineering branch, who have a separate organization called the S.A. Telephone and Telegraph Association. On the engineering side the staff, I think, agree that the Minister has done good work in increasing the fixed establishment in that section of the service, but the Minister is aware that for many years we had a system there of unestablished men, and their average period of service was something like ten or eleven years. That has been remedied to a certain extent, but still more ought to be done in the way of taking more of these officials on to the establishment, especially in the supervising grades. The same thing applies to the female telephone operators. I was astonished to hear that it was possible for a young lady to go into the telephone branch of the service and be there for ten years or more, and still be classed as a temporary assistant. I cannot understand why railway service conditions cannot prevail. Reverting again to the engineering side, the mechanical section feel that, so far as the adoption of the Fifth Report scales is concerned, their claim is a much greater one than the clerical side of the service have got. Men employed in the engineering branch are skilled artisans and mechanicians, and I do not think they should be treated the same as ordinary clerical members of the service. They feel that some special consideration should be given to them on that account. Then there is the question of control. As far as I know, the position is this, the Minister is very often prepared to grant certain concessions to the staff, but owing to the linking up of the postal service with the Public Service Commission and Treasury control, he seems to be very much handicapped. I feel that something should be done in regard to that. I noticed in the discussions at the conference of telephone and telegraph employees the other day the question cropped up of clothing for those who are engaged on very dirty work. I presume that in the ordinary way the Minister would say that these men are entitled to some allowance and would recommend accordingly, but then comes along the Public Service Commission or the Treasury and turns down a recommendation of that sort. I contend that the Minister should have more control, and in cases like that, if the departmental committee recommends it, and the Minister is agreeable, I do not see why it should not be given effect to. That brings up a larger question, namely, as to whether the postal and telegraph department, being a business concern, and presumably run on business lines, should not be taken away from the rest of the public service and treated as such. I am certain that would be better for the public and the staff themselves.

Not the taxpayer.

Why not? I believe the time will come when the taxpayers and the business people of this country, apart from the staff, will take the question up and see whether it is not possible to take the department away from the rest of the public service and treat it as a business concern. I am quite aware that there would probably be a difference of opinion amongst the staff and the general public, as to the advisability of taking this step, but we are dealing with a revenue-earning concern, and I am convinced that it should be placed on the same footing as the Railway and Harbours Services, so that the Minister could exercise more control and give the staff and the general public the benefits of State enterprize.

I had hoped that when this vote was last under discussion we would have finished with it.

Your own supporters are keeping it going.

My hon. friend (Mr. Jagger) has doubled the length of the time on account of his constant interjections over there. I do not think that criticism should be confined to the Opposition, and I am quite prepared to agree that my hon. friend (Mr. Snow) should find some points of contact. I hope my hon. friend (Mr. Jagger) is not going to join issue with me for allowing the hon. member for Salt River (Mr. Snow) to interpolate at all.

I hope he will continue doing so.

So do I. Sweet are the wounds of a friend. I have risen now to answer two or three other points raised, in the hope that hon. members will allow this vote to go through without much delay.

It is only just starting.

That evidences a desire, not to have information, I am afraid, but to hang the vote up.

You cannot say that.

You have already had nine hours on this vote, and I thought I had dealt with all the points. However, I will deal with some of them and allow hon. members to resume the argument and let me deal with it again later on. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) brought up the question of broadcasting, and he first of all said that I put my foot down, and then he joined issue with me because I raised it a little.

I don’t join issue. I want some explanation as to why you raised it.

I will tell the hon. gentleman. It is only right that the House and the country should know what has transpired. The Johannesburg Broadcasting Company found themselves on several occasions in a parlous condition, and they cast around for some means of reviving themselves. The company found that they could not do that and they got into consultation with Mr. Schlesinger, and I was requested by the Broadcasting Company and various other people who were evidently taking an interest in the matter, to agree to the transfer of the licence—and that was my only concern in the matter—to Mr. Schlesinger. That I refused to do absolutely, and still refuse to do. I think this is a most important service, and one that is going to have a great bearing on South Africa and other parts of the world I believe that ultimately and not in the distant future either, the control of broadcasting will be in the hands of the Governments of the world, our own amongst others. I held that view then and I hold it now, and I refused to agree to the transfer of the licence to Mr. Schlesinger. The next interested parties were chiefly represented by the mayor of Johannesburg. I went up to the Rand especially to meet the mayor of Johannesburg and other people interested whom he had got together We discussed the matter from all points of view, with the result that I left after a committee had been formed to go into the matter carefully in the hope that they could resume operations. They were not successful, and in the meantime the country was faced, or all those who had taken out listening-in licences were faced, with the absolute closing down of this concern, and I think I would not earn the commendation of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) if I were to stick to my principles absolutely through thick and thin and let the whole question of broadcasting perish. It was put to me then that a company might be formed, frankly by Mr. Schlesinger, and I said I would consider that if I knew all the details. A company was formed, and it was suggested that the State should have one director. I refused to agree to our having only one director, and said that if we participated at all we should require to have two directors. That was agreed to Mr. Schlesinger proceeded to form his company, we were to have two directors, we were to share in the profits, though, it is true, we do not come in till late in the day in the matter of profits.

What about the losses?

The losses we cut. Altogether I think the arrangement was a very fair one all round. That, in brief, is my explanation of having “lifted my foot.”

Are the directors members of the postal department?

No. I thought that was inadvisable, and that we should have two business men, it we could get them. The two directors are the managing director of the Central Engineering Works in Johannesburg, Mr. Anderson, and an attorney of note, Mr. Stegmann, also of Johannesburg. As all the world knows, negotiations are going on at present between Cape Town and Durban. I do not know what the result is. I am keeping a careful watch in the matter and the company knows perfectly well that if, in the fulness of time, we come to the decision that it is advisable for the State to take over, we will take it over, and it will be easier eventually to do that if the thing is under one head. With regard to the case of Mr. Thompson, whose name was mentioned in the previous debate as “Mr. T.,” I think I ought to make an explanation of his position, because a charge was made against him, I think, by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout (Mr. Blackwell), who was dealing with the case of Mr. Thompson according to the information he had received, and I know he would be the last person in the world to try and do injury to a man. The term used in regard to that gentleman as a disqualification for his appointment was that he had been twice degraded. The term de-graded, in the ordinary acceptance of the word, has a very different meaning to what it has in the service. In the service it means a reduction from one post to another, but degraded in the mind of the ordinary individual sounds very dreadful indeed. I think the hon. member for Bezuidenhout meant it in the sense that it is used in the public service, that is, that he had been de-graded in the sense that he had descended somewhat in the scale. That is not so. It is so actually as a fact, but it was not for any disciplinary reasons.

That sounds Irish.

Oh no, it is not. I have a memorandum from the postmaster-general himself in which he says—

These men were given the option of remaining in the department in a lower grade or taking their pension, and Mr. Thompson decided to accept the position of first-class assistant which was offered to him. Very shortly after that his services were found so valuable that he was restored. The second occasion was with regard to a transfer from Bloemfontein, but he did not have any reduction whatsoever and there was no change of grade at all. So I think hon. members will see that there is a tremendous amount of exaggeration so far as that is concerned. As against that let me show what the northern promotion committee in dealing with the post Mr. Thompson was occupying immediately before he received the last promotion said. They had gone into the question of northern applicants. Mr. Thompson was down here. The committee say—

What did the promotion committee say about his present post?

They had nothing to say about that. They had no opportunity. This is one of the occasions on which one of the associations of the post office has taken umbrage that this did not go to the promotion committee and that it did not follow the ordinary course. I take the responsibility quite frankly and openly. I want to say here and now that there are occasions when a Minister should’ feel that he has the right, in the language of my hon. friend over there, to put his foot down. He has to do it on his own responsibility and take the knocks that come in consequence, and I am quite prepared to do that. Trade unions also recognize the initiative of the individual but in the process of their operations they coalesce the operations of all the individuals.

Did you put up any money for that broadcasting company?

No, the whole expense is being met by the company itself. We have not made any financial contribution to it at all. The hon. member for Port Elizabeth the other day raised the question of public buildings at Port Elizabeth. There is no doubt that the provision of new public buildings is long overdue. I must admit that, but financial stringency prevents it at the moment. At the present moment we are negotiating for a site for public buildings at Port Elizabeth with the school board there and I would welcome the utilization of hon. gentleman and the utilization of his influence.

That is off.

Well, the hon. member has later information than I have. I am afraid that postpones indefinitely the provision of public buildings at Port Elizabeth. Then the hon. member for Von Brandis (Mr. Nathan) asked me about certain increased posts at the top of the tree. That is entirely a matter of reorganization. If the hon. member will go through that heading he will find that the net result is a diminution in posts. We reorganized that as a matter of economy and there is a diminution from 245 to 243 and a reduction from £160,000 to £157,000.

Have these posts been filled by men already in the employment of the Posts and Telegraphs?

Yes. You have only got the two outstanding exceptions. One is the welfare officer and the other is my own private secretary. It really boils down to one, because everyone admits that a Minister has the right to appoint his own secretary from outside if he wishes. With regard to the 1908 men, to which the hon. member for Cape Town (Harbour) (Maj. G. B. van Zyl) draws attention, the hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) also stressed that point, and I must make the same reply to him. I will do my best, but I must in fairness tell him that it is the subject of a special Act of Parliament. It was an executive Act at the time and subsequently a sort of indemnity Act was passed through the Cape House.

It is not a question of legality. The question is whether you would not put a grievance right.

I will do what I can, because I realize it is an injustice. But I want you to thoroughly understand it is a sort of brick wall unless the House takes action and reverses that position. It will mean an amending Bill, but I will see what I can do.

There are numerous of these pension anomalies which we can never rectify.

Then the hon. member for Von Brandis brings up the question of the Johannesburg post office. I will admit it does not meet the requirements by any means. The accommodation is bad and decidedly insufficient. But as for a new post office, my hon. friend had better dismiss that from his mind. It would be too costly altogether; but we are doing something to relieve the situation which I think is better. In connection with the building of the new station at Johannesburg, we are also having a building erected for handling that sort of stuff that need not be brought to the post office, and that will make more room, and we hope by fresh internal arrangements to make the accommodation more adequate. With regard to the very modest request of the hon. member for Barkly West (Mr. W. B. de Villiers), we may be able to give him some this year and some in the dim and distant future. We have to take a bird’s eye view of the telephonic requirements of the country all over the country and we are doing our best to adjust them evenly. In time all the requirements of the countryside will be completely fulfilled. The (hon. member for Cape Town (Harbour) brought up the question of telegrams delivered outside the Cape Town area. It is due to the fact that we close down the sub-offices earlier in the evening than the central office closes, and naturally delivery takes so much longer and you have to charge. No, I think it would be dangerous to leave it to the discretion of officials. Supposing a telegram appeared to be non-important to a certain official and it was important, what a hullabaloo there would be. With regard to telephones, that is all right where you are telephoning to a private individual in his own house, but in the case of a public building, say, an hotel, that would be equally dangerous if we were to telephone the contents of a telegram. That is rather risky. I think my hon. friend had better grin and bear it. The delays in telegrams are much more serious, and I am causing enquiries to be made into that, in fact inquiries are already being made. With regard to parcels taking 15 days to Pretoria that must be only one parcel, surely. That is a very unusual thing. I think all will agree that the post office is most efficient in regard to the speed and accuracy of delivery. With regard to the parcel for Alexandria, that was very insufficiently addressed, but I quite admit that a post office official should think of the South African Alexandria first. It is our fault it went so far astray without our first taking steps and we take the responsibility. The hon. member says parcels should be delivered. Oh no. Parcels are kept not so much in order to save the expense of delivery but in order to satisfy customers’ requirements. You mean the South African internal stuff. Then are you prepared to agree to doubling the number of postmen? It would mean you would have to put up the charges. Generally speaking, I think it works very well. And now he wants to know how much the gardens of the Union Buildings are costing. Frankly I cannot tell him. I am going to look into it and I will look into all the gardens all over the country. I am assured already that Cape town comes off very well indeed. I want to emphasize that if there should be one show place in the Union it is the public buildings and their surroundings which house our administrative officials. The hon. member for Salt River (Mr. Snow) brought up that question of non-consultation with the promotion committee. I think he rather misunderstood that position. The matter I spoke of in Port Elizabeth does not come within the purview of the promotion committee at all. I understood that the appointment had been agreed to by the Public Service Commission. I did not think I was anticipating them at all. That was a mistake on my part but one that did not prove very dangerous in the finish. The hon. member raised the engineering side—about the unestablished men; again, that is a public service matter; I have nothing to do with it, and I can only recommend. They in their wisdom have to decide. I have not complete control of the post office; it is not a sell-controlled institution. The hon. member put it that it should be. I am prepared to agree with him—that the post office, being a business concern, should be divorced from the Public Service Commission.

I do not think the Minister can complain that we have kept him a very long time over the vote; most of us have spoken only 1 per cent. of the time he spoke With regard to the criticism of the expenditure of £100,000 on the National Bureau, I am very glad to see the Minister sat in sackcloth and ashes, and said it was a failure and the money had not been well spent. He made the remark that it did not cost £100,000 in 19 months to send those telegrams, or anything like it. On the other hand, with regard to the reduction of the price of ordinary telegrams, the Minister said he would lose too much by it. In the Auditor-General’s report it is stated that the unit cost per telegram is 1s. 6d., but it does not say whether they are 12-word or 120-word messages. What is the average number of words? Is the 1s. 6d. a bogey put up to show us that a 1s. 3d. telegram costs 1s. 6d. to send? If so, this “£100,000” costs really more than that; and if the £100,000 Government telegrams do not cost that amount, the Minister can reduce our telegrams to 1s. The Minister mentioned that he was not going on with automatic telephones. Personally, I believe I am up against a brick wall with regard to that, and that we shall not see automatic telephones in the country until the Minister vacates the seat in which he is sitting.

In two years.

I wish him joy in his seat for two years, and then we shall get on with the work of putting our post office on progressive lines, as in progressive offices in other countries. During the intervening two years, as the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) reminds me, it may be well to stop telephones and introduce bicycles and messengers which would employ more labour. I would put it to the Minister to think of during the recess, that Edinburgh has just put in automatic telephones to the extent of 11,750 lines, with the capacity of increasing it to 40,000 lines. The Scot, as a rule, is supposed to be pretty canny, and I do not think he would put money into automatic telephones unless he thought he was going to get his money back. I would like to congratulate the Minister on one thing he said this afternoon, and that is that he is at one with many of us that the post office should be put into a water-tight compartment, and then we should know what the post office costs us. Even with his little booklet, the figures in these reports are estimates to such an extent that they are practically valueless. The Minister would do a service to the country if he would arrange with his colleagues in the Ministry to turn the post office into a separate business concern, producing a set of accounts which would show the public what our communications cost us. The Treasury control would come in when the Minister wanted any money, and I am perfectly certain he would soon want some money. Although the Minister has decided not to send these £60,000 worth of telegrams in connection with the National Bureau, this year—that is from 15 to 20 per cent. of the total telegraphic revenue—though he is going to eliminate that work he has not decreased the telegraphic or the general staff by one man; in fact, he has increased the general staff, so that the post office staff will have that much in hand, and it is because of that that I wanted him to say that he was going to put the 12-word telegram back to 1s. One thing the Minister did not answer, and that was whether he was prepared to cease using the post offices for flag propaganda—I do not mean by way of sending letters through the post, but putting up propaganda in post offices in the country districts. If he allowed us to put up our propaganda alongside it would be perfectly fair, and I am sure that our propaganda would beat his.

I want to bring something to the notice of the Minister but first want to thank him for the one telephone line which I got. I want to ask the Minister to provide telephonic connection between Vryburg and Kuruman. I do not believe the Minister will find in the whole of the Free State and in a large portion of the Transvaal two outside villages that have not got a telephone, but these two important villages are not yet connected. My grievance is, however, that as long as 18 months ago various motor lorry services were established in my constituency—I got these services for five different routes, and the motors are running there—but the post is still carried by donkey or pack-ox. It sounds ridiculous, but it is so. The lorries run twice a week; the post is only carried once in fourteen days to the great inconvenience of the inhabitants. Bechuanaland has brilliant prospects but its progress in this respect is being unjustly hampered. I have asked the Minister and the postmaster-general about it, but their excuse is that the railways demand too much, viz., £4 per mile for the carriage of the post by lorry. I also went to the Minister of Railways, and the charge has been reduced by 5s. to £3 15s. I must say that this is still very high, and I want to further support the Minister of Posts to get the charge for motor lorry services reduced a little. The Minister should not, however, make my constituents suffer in consequence and make them wait possibly a further eighteen months without the conveniences until such time as the Railway Department meets the Postal Department. I hope the Minister will give his serious attention to it, because I think that the donkey and the pack-ox are tired by now. Then another small matter with reference to the connection of Stella with Vryburg and further on with Mafeking. At Pitchdal there is a police station which is not more than 300 yards from the railway, and it is not connected. The police stations ought to have telephones especially in the stretched-out areas.

I want to refer to what I have previously brought up with reference to the new type of telephone used for farm lines, as supplied to our system. They are causing much dissatisfaction, and are not giving the services that the previous machines gave.

I have replied to that.

I represented the case to the postmaster-general, and asked him to substitute the old type of machines we had. The postmaster-general replied that of the 168 telephone sets in use in the Barkly East district only 13 were provided with hand sets. In this particular case we have not had that consideration which we usually receive from the postmaster-general. The officials regard the matter purely from a departmental point of view, but the farmer’s pay for the telephones, and even should the hand-sets cost a little more, I am quite sure the farmers would be willing to pay the additional amount. Although we are being furnished with a less convenient type of telephone, we still have to pay the same rental as we did when the better type was supplied. The Minister himself would not tolerate for a single day a telephone instrument with a fixed mouthpiece. These machines are very inconvenient to use, for while the hon. member for Ladybrand (Mr. Swart) Would have to go on his knees to speak through it, a short person would have to stand on a soap-box in order to reach it. I understand the rural telephone lines are a source of revenue to the department, and I hope the matter will receive favourable consideration, as the request is a very reasonable one.

The Minister was perfectly frank in his admission of the inadequacy of the accommodation at the Johannesburg post office, but he gave us no hope whatever. As his term of office may not be very long, he might at least have held out some prospect of improvement. It is very inconvenient for people to have to go from the general post office to the parcels office in Rissik Street. Johannesburg pays £7,497 annually for rents to other landlords apart from its own public buildings. If that amount were capitalized, it would pay for a new post office. Johannesburg is the hub of South Africa.

Oh!

Yes, notwithstanding the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger). If it were not for Johannesburg, Cape Town would be dead.

Cape Town was in existence long before Johannesburg was thought of.

But we are keeping it up, and we are very glad to be able to do so. I understand the Minister to say that he does not interfere with official appointments.

No.

The Public Service Commission, in its annual report, refers to four vacancies for first-grade postal officers. The postmaster-general recommended four second-grade officers for promotion. Three of the recommendations were accepted by the Minister, but the fourth he would not entertain. The Public Service Commission, however, supported the recommendation of the postmaster-general, and I think the Minister took too much on himself in going against the recommendation of the postmaster-general and the commission. The Minister should let us know why he departed from their recommendations, although I admit he was within his legal rights in so doing. Upon whose information did the Minister decline to accept the recommendation? Even the departmental committee supported the postmaster-general and the commission. If such things can take place, where is the security of tenure of men who are entitled to promotion?

The Minister complains that the consideration of this Vote has taken some time. I asked him one question the other night, but he has not replied, and he must not therefore complain if I repeat the question.

I am sorry.

In the Transkei we have a large number of traders, and the traders in the vicinity of the terminus of the railway extension from Cofimvaba want a telephone. I understand there is some difficulty in giving them telephones at farm rates, because they are commercial men. Telephones are absolutely necessary in the native territories, and provision should be made for these cases.

Will the traders be agreeable to go on the farmers’ lines, which do not give privacy?

They are perfectly prepared to be treated on the same conditions as the farmers are. I also wish to refer to the question of the pensions of native officials in the Transkei. I have received a complaint from a postal official, a native, who is not allowed to contribute to the pension fund because his pay is only £8 a month. He has had 20 years’ service, and is only drawing £4 10s. per month.

The hon. member is now advocating an alteration in the law.

I do not know if the facts are right. I do not think they are, and I would like information. The general principle seems wrong that he should not be able to contribute to the pensions fund. Native teachers who draw small salaries are allowed to contribute, as are also other native employees in the Civil Service.

The hon. member is again advocating an alteration of the law.

I do not know what the law is. Is that the law?

The Minister cannot increase salaries of any class of person without a law.

I will go into it.

I am only pointing out that there should be some provision for these native officials, even although they are drawing a salary which is sufficient. I hope the Minister will give me some information on that.

I will go into it, but I cannot give any information.

Owing to the extension of the telephone system to all the villages in the Territories, the main line to East London is now overloaded and needs duplication. I myself have had to wait several hours to communicate with that place. I ask the Minister if he can duplicate the line? Of course, we might at the beginning of the session table motions like those for the railways asking for more telephones, but we don’t want to do that. The Minister has given five bridges to the Free State and the Transvaal. I think he might take four bridges away and give telephones to the country.

I am doing both.

I have a small question to ask before the Minister gives his final reply. It is regarding item G on page 157— postage stamps. I see a considerable reduction of £4,800 this year as compared with last year. I do not object to the decrease; in fact, I think it is the best item in the whole vote, considering he has jumped £71,500 increase in one year. It is, therefore, desirable to see a decrease, but I want to know the meaning of this decrease.

I want, in the first place, to invite the Minister’s attention to the post office at Skeerpoort. It is entirely Unsuited for postal services. I dealt with the matter last year. A very large post is dealt with at that place, and the post office consists of a corrugated iron building against the back wall of a shop, and things cannot continue like that. The telephone which is there is on the stoep, and one has no opportunity of speaking without people in the neighbourhood hearing. If facilities are provided for people in the large towns, why are we not given them? There ought to be a proper telephone box at the shop at Skeerpoort, but it ought no longer to be simply on the stoep outside. It is not in my constituency, but it is the post office I have to use every day. Another grievance is the parcels which arrive from Europe to the order of people there, such as clothes or other things. They are detained in Pretoria, and when one wants to collect them you have to take your motor or cart and go to Pretoria to have them opened there. Why cannot they be sent up from Pretoria? At those places where there are post offices there is a postmaster in whose presence the parcels can be opened. The people now get notice that they must come and open the parcels within such and such a time, and they could easily be sent up. Still greater is the grievance with reference to the post office at Maritana, which is still worse than the one at Skeerpoort. The Minister of Lands knows that it is not a small place. It is near a large native location, and an important place. Hundreds of farmers live there, and the office is in the middle in an insignificant little room. Native men and women and white people all go into that little room, and there is much business and a big post but few facilities. I am advocating this specially because it is wrong that the Europeans and the coloured people have to mix there, and it may be the cause of a conflict one of these days. I have business there myself, and have had to go in amongst the coloured women to get into the post office in order to use the telephone.

I should like to ask the Minister a question regarding a claim against the Department of Public Works by the contractors who constructed the Nelspoort Sanatorium for extras, time lost and damages by reason of delays. It was a claim for £6,000 odd. From the Auditor-General’s report it appears the contractors gave notice of submission of the claim to arbitration in terms of the contract, and also gave notice nominating the contractors’ arbitrator. The department was required under’ the statute within a certain time to nominate its arbitrator, but owing to gross neglect by a responsible official of the department no arbitrator was appointed within the specified time, with the result that the claim was left to be dealt with by the contractors’ arbitrator alone, the department being unrepresented, except by counsel. There is no explanation in the Auditor-General’s report of how the department came to ignore the notice sent to it by the attorneys of the contractors, and why the department failed to appoint its arbitrator to act in conjunction with the arbitrator appointed by the contractors. The result was an award of £2,000 was made against the Government, notwithstanding the fact that the matter had been submitted to the law advisers, who advised that the contractors had no legal claim whatever. That seems a scandalous waste of public money and a careless and unbusinesslike way of doing business. How did this failure to appoint an arbitrator come about? The contractors’ arbitrator was left a free hand to deal with a claim of this sort, with the result stated. There has been gross negligence somewhere, for which the taxpayer has had to pay.

I want to call attention to the fact that there is no quorum.

You want to get away to-night, don’t you? You are only calling attention to the fact that you are holding us up. [Quorum obtained.]

I ask the Minister whether he has gone into the question of the use of official stamps instead of the system of charging each department a lump sum for services rendered by his department to them? Other countries have found it economical, and it would probably be a better system for this country than the one we have at the present time. There is a general tendency of departments to post any quantity of correspondence, and send any number of telegrams at great length, upon which there is no check. The matter came up the other day, when it was stated that the average payment for telegrams was actually less than their cost. The statement made was that we were wiring telegrams at less than cost. Official telegrams, I believe, in this calculation are not separated from public telegrams, only a general division of the total revenue was made, and the average cost made up in that way. I may be wrong, but at all events Press telegrams are taken at a low cost and we are led to believe the whole service is being carried on for the public at less than cost. That really cannot be the case, and mixing all telegrams up gives a wrong impression. If stamps were issued for telegrams and correspondence, and all departments had to put in a requisition on their Treasury vote for the amount of their stamps, they would know what they are really spending. At present the head of the department gets it charged just as an amount debited to him, and it does not matter to him what he puts through, but presently when, if clerks came to him and said—

the heads would ask—

The same thing with official correspondence. I think that if you had a system of stamps for official telegrams and for the correspondence instead of printing on a die “O.H.M.S.,” it might lead to a considerable economy. A requisition for stamps would afford some check. I ask the Minister to give attention to this matter. Then in regard to broadcasting, so far as control is concerned. I have no wish to take that out of the hands into which it has got. I think they are very efficient hands and the service will be well done, but what I am afraid of is that, as in America, there is a way by which the listener-in can be compelled to use only a certain receiver, and they get control of the sale of this particular set to receive the broadcasting. Has the Minister any control over the profit that can be made by the licensees out of these special machines? The public may be made to pay rather dearly by having to buy a particular machine. I hope we are sufficiently protected that if there is dissatisfaction on the part of the public as regards the service, the State is in a position to cancel the licences and take possession of broadcasting.

The other evening when the Minister referred to the discontinuance of the National Information Bureau he made a reference to the country postmasters which I think is susceptible of a little misunderstanding. I understood him to say that the country postmasters were storekeepers, and being in receipt of telegraphic advices about market prices a commercial advantage was available to them before it reached the ordinary public and it might be made wrong use of. I hope the Minister will make it clear that he was merely referring to postal agents, who are both postal agents and storekeepers, and that he was not referring to country postmasters who might be brought under some wrong suspicion in regard to the Minister’s statement. I am quite sure he will be able to make that clear. Now the Minister’s responsibility for fixing 1s. per hour for unskilled labour employed under Government contracts has been under discussion, and I want to emphasize in that connection that there are two points that have not been cleared up, firstly, as to whether the master builders are to bear the brunt of the responsibility for this rate of pay, and secondly, the effect of the Minister’s decision in this matter on the native situation. The master builders apparently resent what the Minister has said as to their responsibility for this action, and in a letter which was handed to my colleague the member for Pretoria East (Mr. Giovanetti) they referred to the matter in these terms—

Oh, no, I don’t agree with that.

That is the considered statement of the master builders, and they go on to say—

It seems to me that there is an absolute divergence between the Minister and the master builders on that point. They maintain that it was the Minister’s own idea, and that he was not prepared to come out openly and declare that it was for the purpose of broadening the sphere of white labour, but confided to them that that was his idea. The second point is as to the effect on the native situation, and if the master builders’ statement is correct that the Minister’s aim was really to apply this only to white labour, that he was not sincere in wishing to apply it to all alike, then I think he was trifling with a situation that has led to a considerable disturbance amongst the natives for no purpose at all. It simply means that in aiming at increasing the sphere of white labour, which I do not in any way blame him for, by his doing it in this clumsy manner, he has set the natives of the country by the ears, and he has done a distinct dis-service to the peace and harmony that should prevail between employers and native employees. Then there is one other point upon which I demur to the Minister’s answer to the hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel), who quoted from a letter said to have been written by one of the Minister’s officials. The Minister repudiated that letter, and said he had disowned it. I think in view of what the master builders have told us, that the Minister’s own position has not been very clear, and it certainly seems to me to savour of an injustice for him to disown an official who apparently wrote a letter believing be was expressing the Minister’s view in regard to the reasons for the employment of white labour. The hon. member for Newcastle (Mr. Nel) quoted that letter as having been written on the 4th December, 1926, and I understood the Minister to say that letter was not written with his authority and he had disowned it.

Absolutely. As soon as I knew the letter was written, I did.

Would the Minister not be following more closely the practice of Ministers in the past to accept responsibility for what his officials have done?

No, not in a case like that.

Especially where the officials’ attitude is so completely borne out by the master builders’ contention.

No.

There is only one more series of remarks I wish to make, and that is in connection with the promotion of the telephone manager. I understood the Minister to say that the promotion committee had not dealt with that particular promotion under discussion, but on a previous occasion they had recommended this official’s advancement to another grade. A large number of officials feel that the promotion committee should have dealt with this matter as well, and their objections would have been liquidated had the Minister taken that course. Among those officials there are no fewer than eight who are senior to the official chosen, all of whom have exceedingly good qualifications as far as one is able to tell from the technical certificates they hold, and the administrative experience they have had. The particular official chosen entered the Cape service in 1910 as a night operator, and at that time most of the men he has now superseded were senior men performing responsible duties, and some of them, even at that stage, performing administrative work. It seems to me to be asking for trouble to supersede men who are eminently qualified for the appointment, which would naturally be theirs in the ordinary course of promotion, by a man who was evidently considerably junior, both in salary and grade. [Time limit.]

I had hoped that we had left the Thompson incident behind us, but the hon. member has raised the point that eight men were senior to him, and that the question of consultation is really the bone of contention. That has been advanced by several members, and I have replied more or less satisfactorily to them, and certainly satisfactorily to myself, on that point. With regard to seniority, let me tell him that there are other factors to be taken into consideration; amongst others, Mr. Thompson was in the Glasgow exchange for many years before he came to this country. It is one of the most up-to-date in the British Isles, with a standard of efficiency of five seconds, equal to London, the only two that approach our own standard. Mr. Thompson was very largely responsible for that in Glasgow, and he was largely responsible for extending their activities, and, in short, showed himself to be a very zealous officer and exceedingly zealous here, capable and anxious to get the department on as high a level as possible. I personally was satisfied with his qualifications. With regard to this question of the letter, he asked why I did not follow previous practice. Because it was contrary to my instructions, that is why. The letter sent was contrary to my instructions. I was as clear to my departmental officials as I was clear to the master builders, who, so far from my having initiated it, were urging me and my officials to agree to its being confined to white labour, and I refused on both occasions. I hope my hon. friend will accept that assurance. It is perfectly true, and if there is any misunderstanding it is not of my making. With regard to the country postmasters and postal agents, it was, of course, the postal agents I was referring to. With regard to official stamps, that is having our attention; that is, the department should have to buy those stamps and put them on the letters themselves. An important point was raised by the hon. member for Klip River (Mr. Anderson) with regard to the Nelspoort Sanatorium. I admit the charge he has brought straight away. It was a state of affairs I found when I came into office, and I know my predecessor, as well as myself, raised the question and kicked up a row about it. There was undoubted laxity on the part of the department, which allowed such a state of affairs to develop. All the strictures of the hon. gentleman we have to accept, and express our regret. The hon. member for Von Brandis (Mr. Nathan) wanted to know something about my going against the Public Service Commission. After all, a Minister is in a position sometimes to know better than a, comparatively speaking, outside body as to what are the qualifications of an individual, and I happen to possess that information with regard to that gentleman. The hon. member for Rondebosch (Mr. Close) again brings up the question of the bureau of national information. Of course, in that particular case telegrams did not cost that amount of money, because there were repetition telegrams all over the country. They congested the lines and perhaps caused delay in the matter of private telegrams, and we have swept the whole thing away. With regard to this flag propaganda, there is only one office, I hear, where a gentleman was so zealous that he posted up the flag which is going to be the flag of South Africa. If you ask me to stop all propaganda, then I must stop you sending your newspapers, at any rate, sending them at so cheap a rate that it is a loss to the department. We are in the extraordinary position of carrying considerably under cost propaganda against ourselves, which is not true, either— that is the joke of the whole thing. With regard to the telephone connections that are required, hon. members can depend upon it that we will give it our serious attention. The hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. Payn) wants to know why traders cannot be given telephonic communication. Are they prepared to go on the farmers’ lines, which are not secret? The hon. member said “yes.” In the light of that information I will go into it. I hate to create a precedent. These farmers’ lines were introduced to introduce as cheap a system as possible, and they are not the ordinary telephones by any means at all. The hon. member also wants to know about the duplication of the trunk line between Umtata and East London. The whole question of duplication is being gone into, and maybe the hon. member’s might be one on the programme. The question raised by the hon. member for Witwatersberg (Lt.- Col. N. J. Pretorius) about telephone boxes being on the stoep will be gone into.

Has the Minister heard that three prisoners escaped from the Stellenbosch gaol again some three days ago? For four years a new gaol has been promised, and we are still getting along with the old one. We have dangerous prisoners there, and they require only their nails to get out. They were released by the Minister because the gaol was in such a condition that they can just walk out. Then I would like to ask the Minister cannot he make a reduction in telephone charges where the service is only for a few hours a day, compared with telephones where they have long service hours? In the Strand, where they have short hours, the charges are excessive. A good many applications have come from Somerset West, which could not be granted by the department, because they say that farmers’ lines are wanted. Cannot the Minister also give us telephones where you can hear better? Give us something decent. It is very difficult to hear with some of these old telephones.

I would like to support what the hon. member has just said about the shortness of the hours allowed in the country towns. In Newcastle they are charged a rent of £10 per annum, and the hours are from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. For some time there has been an agitation amongst the people of Newcastle for these times to be extended. When the mail train comes in in the morning the telephone is not in operation. A little time ago the Minister asked the public to support him in a financial scheme he had—obtaining money without payment of interest by the issue of paper money. He might try that scheme in his department and reduce the charges we have to pay to-day. Why does he not try it?

I would also like to support what the hon. member for Stellenbosch (Mr. J. P. Louw) said. Only a few weeks ago I called on the Minister with regard to the telephone connection at Bergville Show Ground which is used for about seven days in the year, and for which the agricultural society is required to pay ten guineas a year, which is out of all reason. This telephone was installed and used free of charge one time, but this privilege has recently been taken away. If the Minister will make the annual subscription a reasonable one, the farmers might be induced to continue its use but the subscription asked is prohibitive. I asked the Minister last year, if he had received any complaints about unsuitability of material used in telephone construction on farm lines, particularly the poles. I can give the Minister one instance of a line 17 to 18 miles in length which was half blown down within a few weeks of being erected, and the poles were almost doubled in two. During the Easter recess I was there, and I saw that the poles were still facing north, south-east and west, just as they were 12 months ago. This was not caused by an abnormal wind or gale, and it is due to the poles being too light altogether. I have similar complaints from other parts of my constituency of poles being doubled up by high winds.

Are they farm lines?

Yes, they are all farm lines. The Minister might consider putting in poles which are better able to resist normal weather conditions.

I drew the Minister’s attention a few days ago to the agricultural parcels post. I saw him in his office last year on the same matter, which is, that the agricultural parcels post is practically useless to farmers for the conveyance of fruit. Since last year—I do not know whether it is a new regulation or the strict application of an old regulation—they have to put their fruit parcels into air-tight receptacles, and the result is that within a short time the fruit perishes.

I told you I was going to inquire into it.

You made no reply to that.

I beg your pardon, I did. You were not here.

I was here when the Minister replied, but he overlooked that matter.

I did not.

There is another matter to which I would like to draw the Minister’s attention, and that is the defacing of the addresses of letters by stamping such things as “Eat more fruit,” “Buy South African manufactures” and the like, on them. It is very good to advertise South African products but do it in such a way as not to deface the addresses. As a result, mistakes are made. You may open a letter in mistake, because the name of the person to whom the letter is addressed has been defaced.

That is so.

I was very disappointed with the Minister’s reply over the ocean mail contract. What he told us practically amounts to this that as there is a freight war on the Government could not go on with the negotiations, otherwise they would be taking sides. I should say this is just the time to enter into negotiations. In 1924 a similar state of affairs existed. An outside line competed for the South African trade, but as soon as it joined the conference lines its terms were stiffened. The Minister must get on with the ocean mail contract, for unless we have a contract providing for the lifting of perishable products the producers will suffer.

Mr. Barlow, the Minister is very anxious to get his vote through in record time.

We are not anxious—you are.

Well, if the Minister in charge of this vote is anxious to get through he should give more satisfactory replies.

We don’t mind sitting until 11 o’clock to-night.

I put a question to the Minister regarding his statement that natives could not live decently on less than 8s. a day. What was the Minister’s authority for saying that? Did he think he was serving any good purpose by saying it, and was he aware of the effect of making such a statement in times like these? In his reply he adopted a rather frivolous attitude, and suggested that letters and telegrams which had been referred to by hon. members on this side were probably faked. That was a very improper attitude to adopt. If a telegram or a letter is referred to by us on this side it may be taken as bona fide, and the Minister has no right to suggest that it is faked. That is not a dignified attitude and should not be adopted. Then the Minister’s arguments were distinctly fallacious. First he said there was no native unrest, but he should have inquired first from the Minister of Native Affairs if there was any foundation for his statement. He must have assumed that because he did not make any inquiries the thing did not exist. His statement has been seized on by the I.C.U. which boasts that it has the Minister behind it in its organization, and it has taken 8s. a day, his figure, as the irreducible minimum. On what grounds did the Minister fix that minimum? How does he know that a native in Natal cannot live on less than 8s. a day? His reply was that 8s. a day was a mere bagatelle, and he even referred to mines in the Transvaal where natives are actually earning as much as 18s. a day. That, however, was a distinctly misleading statement, because the natives concerned were semi-skilled people doing piece-work. It was the industry and ability which they showed which enabled them to earn 18s. a day. Then the Minister put an illustration showing that, if anything, the raising of unskilled labour pay to a minimum of 8s. a day had cheapened Government contracts. He indicated a particular case in which he called upon his department to estimate for the cost of erecting a building, the labour in which should be paid for at the old rate. He next called for public tenders for the same building on the basis of white labour at a higher rate of pay, the accepted tender being lower than the departmental estimate; he puts that forward that as an illustration that a higher rate of pay produces a better article. But that is no comparison at all. The Minister should have called for tenders both on the old basis and the new. As it is, the Minister has been responsible for bringing about a great deal of trouble, and the-time has arrived when Cabinet Ministers should weigh their statements carefully.

I am surprised that the hon. member for Weenen (Maj. Richards) has again raised this question. I take it that we are all anxious that white people should have greater opportunities of obtaining employment, but if we pay a standard rate on which white men cannot live we are thereby excluding them from these avenues of employment. On the other hand, the Minister’s minimum rate of 8s. a day does afford additional openings for Europeans. I have no doubt that the hon. member is anxious to do what he possibly can to raise the standard of the native population. If he is anxious to raise the native standard he does not suggest that it will be done by keeping the natives down to the lowest level. The better the wages you pay to the natives the better the opportunity is to raise (the standard and thereby to raise the standard of the white population, because the unfair competition to that extent will be eliminated. From an ordinary economic point of view the effect of this principle of 8s. a day has not been an expensive one, but it has resulted in greater efficiency. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) admitted last session that higher wages, from an economic point of view, are a sound theory, because they make for greater production and they make the employee much more careful because he has more to lose if he does not play the game, and the employer himself, having to pay the high wage, sees he carries out the work satisfactorily and utilizes better and more up-to-date methods in his business. The hon. member for Weenen (Maj. Richards) has raised the question again of native unrest as a result of the policy of the Minister. In fairness to the Minister, and to the committee of this House, it should be contradicted. At the time the statements were made we doubted whether the information was accurate and whether this unrest was in fact due to the policy of the Minister or to other reasons. We now see in the newspapers—the “Natal Witness,” the “Sunday Times” and the “Cape Times” of the 23rd of this month an important statement on native unrest in Natal. It is said to be due to improper food. The article in the “Cape Times” says that the unrest among the natives in Natal, to which attention was drawn to in the House on Thursday, by some of the Natal members, is described as being due, to a great extent, to the lack of proper rations. It goes on to say that farmers and other employers were still clinging to the old idea that all that was necessary was to feed the boys porridge morning, afternoon and evening with the result employers lose thousands of pounds every year from disease or desertion of the natives. This article went on to say that the view of the native welfare officer was supported by the assistant health officer of the Union. The statement comes from one who has no reason to use it politically—from the native welfare officer, supported by an official dealing with the matter, and they say definitely that the native unrest in Natal is due essentially to this question of the manner in which the natives are treated in regard to rations. I believe the Minister’s policy will result in this evil being overcome and will enable the natives to become a more contented source of labour supply. In the light of this the hon. member for Weenen (Maj. Richards) will agree that the statement that the unrest is due to the policy of the Minister is not well founded.

I am glad the hon. member has quoted from that report. If he had made inquiries he would have found the explanation. It is true a large number of natives are brought into Natal from the native locations, and they only come when they are really starved and unhappy and their condition has to be built up before they are fit for strong work. That should have been made clear at the time that report was issued. When you get an unhappy people they become easy prey to the agitators and they are more prone to fall into the hands of the I.C.U. people than those who are well-fed and looked after. This does not apply to the Natal farm labourers. The statement made by the hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) (Mr. Barlow) the other day, with regard to the treatment of the boys in Natal, was not an exaggerated one. He showed that under present conditions they were getting a high rate of pay. They have a home and agricultural land all for nothing, and it is the imposition of this 8s. a day on top of this that has created this discontent. They have taken their cue from the 8s. a day.

Amendment put and negatived.

Vote, as printed, put and agreed to.

On Vote 32, “Public Works,” £838,562,

I want to ask the Minister when he is going to take in hand the consolidation of the law relating to the municipal rating of public buildings. That has been before his department since 1917.

I regret the hon. member cannot discuss that. It is a question of policy, which he should have discussed on the Minister’s vote.

It is not a question of policy. I want to know when the Minister is going to take action in the matter.

I am sorry the hon. member has missed his opportunity.

I do not know where we are going to be, if that is the case. I have kept this back for the express purpose of raising the question on this vote.

Will the hon. member proceed, and we will see how far we can help him.

This is a question which appears in the Auditor-General’s report. He has called attention to it for some years back. In 1917 he called attention to it, and again in 1922. We have had a lot of law cases arising out of this question. We had one recently by the municipality of Wynberg, which you lost and had to pay up. Then there has been one at Durban, which you lost and had to pay up. When is the department going to take action and introduce a Bill to put this matter straight?

Order. The hon. member cannot discuss that.

I have finished with that. I want to ask another question in regard to Public Works. I think this will be quite in order. There is a paragraph in the report of the Auditor-General also, in which he speaks of some unnecessary expense. I would like to call the attention of the Minister of Finance to this, although, I admit, it is not a big amount. At page 279 of his report the Auditor-General says—

I want to call attention to two matters in regard to this, first and foremost to the expenditure of £250 on a carpet at Groot Schuur. I think that is excessive, and a piece of gross extravagance. Then, I contend that it should have been left in the hands of the High Commissioner in London, whereas a special man was deputed, at a cost of £7 2s. 10d., to help to buy the carpet. That alone amounts to almost 3½ per cent. on the cost of the carpet.

With regard to municipal rating, that has been under consideration, as the hon. member rightly puts it, and more particularly since we have been in office.

You never get forward.

I think it was under consideration for a period of ten years by our predecessors.

Quite so, but you promised to do better.

Why did not you do it?

It was not in my department.

Why did not your Government do it?

It is no use blaming other people when you are in office yourselves.

We are going to do it; we are going to bring this Bill in. As a matter of fact, it was on the cards that we might have brought it in this year, but we are rather congested and we could not do it. I want the assistance of my hon. friend (Mr. Jagger), because it is going to be an extremely difficult Bill to pilot through this House, and, what is more, the Bill is going to be costly. I want to say this, that it will mean compensation, and the compensation will amount to a capital sum, which will be the amount that we are paying at the present time in two provinces capitalized. It is going to be a very difficult thing to come to a conclusion in the first place, and to get it through the House in the second place. In regard to this wasting of money (£7 2s. 10d.) in England, I entirely agree with the hon. member. It was really a stupid thing to do, when you look at it. In regard to the £250, the cost of the carpet itself, that does not come out of our vote; there is a special fund for it, I understand.

It comes out of the taxpayers’ pocket.

Oh, no, it is the Rhodes Trust. We do not have to find that.

I will explain. As a matter of fact, £25,000 was left by Mr. Rhodes for Groote Schuur. That was paid to the Public Debt Commissioners, and £1,000 is the interest that they allow. There is a great deal more than £1,000 spent on Groote Schuur every year. If you put the whole thing together, you will find there is something like £5,000 a year spent on Groote Schuur.

£4,000 a year.

So that the £250 comes out of the taxpayers’ pocket in the long run.

I would like to ask the Minister if his attention has been directed to what. I am informed, is a case of serious corroding that is going on at the very fine statue of “Physical Energy” at the foot of Rhodes Monument? I understand from people who know something about this, that a good deal of damage is being done on account of the weathering. Perhaps the Minister will enquire into that.

Yes, I will do that.

Can the Minister give us any information in regard to the subsidies to fire brigades? I see an item on the estimates “Grants to fire brigades.” I believe these brigades are in various parts of the country. Is this a charge that is rendered necessary owing to the desire of the Government to keep down the insurance rate, or is it their interest in the protection of public buildings that induces the Government to provide for these fire brigades? It is difficult to see how this charge can be justified where, under ordinary circumstances, fire brigades are a charge on the local authority of the particular area. Will the Minister tell us what particular towns are singled out for this subsidy?

I would like to tell the hon. gentleman that I almost brought a tremendous storm about my ears by cutting out this item this year. I find that it is a carry-over from pre-Union days, and we are more or less committed to it. It is paid in the four capitals, and it is really an insurance on our premises there.

Vote put and agreed to.

On Vote 33 “Lands,” £190,716.

In view of the hour and the lengthy nature of the discussion we are likely to have on this vote, I suggest that we report progress, and I move accordingly. To-day is a public holiday, and a large number of members on both sides are absent. We have finished the votes of the Minster of Posts and Telegraphs, and, if progress be now reported, it would be appreciated, especially in view of what is to happen this evening, and, considering the progress that has been made, perhaps the Minister would be good enough to accept this motion.

I will accept the motion.

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

House Resumed:

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