I move—

seconded.

I am rather confused between the first report and the second one. The first report stated that in the opinion of the committee a further enquiry was indicated, and I understand if this report is adopted now, the matter will be closed, although in the second report it says the committee has been unable to carry the investigation any further. I take the implication to be that a further investigation should be carried out by this committee or some other judicial commission of enquiry. It appears to me the adoption of this report will be closing the matter entirely. Yesterday, when the first report was read, the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) stated that certain men concerned were absent from the country, and I take it we should not allow the matter to rest where it is without those men being heard, men who are prominent in public life and others. The committee, in the first and also in the second report, have indicated that a further and deeper enquiry should be held. I want to know whether this report closes the matter entirely, or whether an opportunity will be given for a further enquiry for the sake of everybody concerned and for the sake of the Government and the country. I feel with the committee that no imputation was made against the honour of the Minister of Labour, but I do think closer and more thorough investigation should be made into all the circumstances of the transaction.

As I understand the whole position, it is this. Hon. members will recollect that when I first gave notice for the appointment of the committee, I said if it should not be finished in time, I would be in favour of a judicial committee being appointed, because, to my mind, it was very necessary that a report should be arrived at and brought out before the elections. Unfortunately, I understand it would be totally contrary to the rules and the dignity of the House, to get persons from outside to enquire into matters which have occurred within the House. It had not occurred to me at the time, but as far as I know, it is a valid objection. If this is not the correct procedure, then I would certainly be in favour of a committee or a commission being appointed at the earliest opportunity to enquire and to bring out a report. That is the first point. The second point is that I saw amongst others the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Duncan) as to the possibility of the present committee being constituted as a commission immediately after the House adjourned, but it was pointed out to me by my hon. friend that that was gaining nothing, because the commission would not be able to get hold of Mr. Roos, who, we all know, is at present in Europe, and who will probably not be back before the election; with the result that they will not get any further than they have been able to do on this point. If both these points are valid, it is very clear to me that after the elections this question will immediately be taken up. Certainly Mr. Roos will not allow it to stand where it is. I take it that what will happen after the elections will be that another committee of the House will be appointed to go into the question and bring in a report. I do not know whether I have correctly stated the position. You, Mr. Speaker, are in a better position to do so. I shall be only too glad if a commission can be appointed by the present Government.

I understand the position to be in regard to the point raised by the hon. member for Albany (Mr. Struben), that the report before us is and remains an interim report; it is not a final report, and the proposal is to publish that interim report with the evidence given up to date. In regard to the other matter to which the Prime Minister has referred, of course it will be necessary to pursue this matter hereafter; I think we are all agreed on that—that the matter requires further enquiry hereafter and after the election. But I still adhere to the opinion I expressed in this House, which I tried to embody in the amendment, that the enquiry should cover a larger field than these so-called imputations against Ministers which are disclaimed, and which were never meant to be imputations, and do not really touch the case which has been made in this House. I feel strongly still that, for the good of this country and the good name of its administration, there should be a further enquiry, and I hope that under the new conditions after the election there will be a thorough enquiry, on the lines of that into the Durban elevator—not a select committee, but of a more impartial, outside character; that this enquiry will not be limited to the question of imputations against Ministers which were not intended to be made, and that it will go to the root of the whole matter, and cover the whole case of the association of the Government with this private scheme. I hope, hereafter, when this matter is pursued, that it will not pursue this futile course of going into what was not charged against Ministers.

I do not know what the right hon. member for Standerton (Gen. Smuts) wants to impute with regard to his suggested enquiry, as far as the association of the Government is concerned with this private company. I think the terms of reference, as far as this particular part of the enquiry is concerned, are quite wide enough to enquire into any improper association of the Government with this company. When it comes to the question of administration, what is the object of the enquiry? Is it to prove that the scheme as administered by my hon. friend (the Minister of Labour) is a failure? If that is what you want, you are at liberty to say that now. Our reply is, we have had scores of land settlement schemes in this country which have been hopeless failures. As far as this scheme is concerned, it is possible, but by no means probable, that there will be financial loss, but we have had scores of schemes where the State has lost millions. Does the hon. member want an enquiry into those schemes? Does the right hon. member want an enquiry into the failure of the Sundays River scheme? As far as the action of the Government is concerned, where any action is alleged which is in conflict with the public interest, if the present reference is not wide enough, the Government is at all times prepared to give the House an opportunity of investigation; but when he says we must have an enquiry into a settlement scheme which has not turned out the success which hon. members anticipated, that is mere camouflage. The reasons have been debated in this House, and I do not think any further light can be thrown on the subject; I submit there is no reason for an enquiry as far as that is concerned.

One must felicitate the Minister of Labour on the result of this enquiry. Still, it does seem that, if there was a bad taste about the thing in the beginning, it has not been entirely removed. The rules of the House do not permit the committee functioning during the recess, or outside members enquiring into things which have happened inside the House. I do not know much about the rules of the House, and, perhaps, less of its dignity; but it seems to me that if there is anything to create a bad taste it is that anything that has transpired inside the House does not need an enquiry—that is derogatory to the dignity of the House. If there is anything at all which creates an impression either on hon. members or on the public outside, it is that a committee has been set up, and acquitted one individual amongst several individuals; if it concentrates its function upon that one individual and leaves the other individuals who, by implication, were also impugned, it has not carried out the functions for which it was appointed. My own impression is that where the conduct of Ministers or any hon. member of this House is concerned, which it is required to investigate, this House, in conformity with its dignity, should most certainly appoint people from outside to carry on such an enquiry. After all, if this Assembly places its dignity above everything——

It is not a question of dignity; it is a question of the privileges of this House which prevent the appointment of a body outside the House to enquire into matters which have taken place inside the House.

You can go on with your undignified swan song.

I suppose I shall have other Swans to keep me company. I do not think it will be the case of a duet, but of a chorus of swans. Whether it is a swan song or not, there will be some volume of sound about it. I regret that the impression is now created that this committee was reconstituted yesterday with the object, the especial object, of clearing one individual against whom certain alleged imputations were made, while other individuals were also closely concerned. Take, for instance, Mr. Rosenberg. I take it that Mr. Rosenberg is clearly entitled to meet the imputations made against him.

He will get a chance.

I do not see why the enquiry should have to do with one individual and that the others should be excluded. If the committee does not carry out its duties on the basis of equity, on what other basis can it carry them out? I regret it is not possible for the enquiry to continue, and I believe that the reconstituting of the committee will reflect rather harmfully upon the Minister, and, at the same time, to give no extra privileges to other people who are excluded.

Before you call upon the Clerk to read the first order, Mr. Speaker, may I be allowed to take the opportunity now, in view of the fact that I must go from Parliament soon, of recording the expressed appreciation of my colleagues and myself, in this the last session of Parliament, for the very courteous and impartial way in which, as far as we have been able to observe, you have conducted the business of this House, and to thank you most heartily for the manner in which you have always treated us. I hope we shall be able to return here and sit under your guidance in the next Parliament.

I wish to thank the hon. member for the generous way in which he has expressed himself on behalf of himself and his colleagues.

I move, as an unopposed motion—

I understand the Senate has not yet finished, so that we cannot proceed any further, but that they will be done in about half-an-hour or so. I want, however, to avail myself of the opportunity of saying a few words. I am so glad to see our old friend, the hon. member tor Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt), in our midst once more, and I can assure him that we all looked forward to his return. Although it does not seem so when I look at the grey heads next to him, I think he is the oldest member of the House, and I want to give him the assurance that we have learnt with considerable regret that he and some of the other old friends, of whom I notice the hon. members for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) and Beaconsfield (Col. Sir David Harris), intend to say farewell as members of Parliament. Now I only wish to say apropos of them, and with regard to my other friends, such as the hon. member for Durban (Berea) (Mr. Henderson), whom I also notice in his place, that it is really with a sincere feeling of pain, yes, sorrow, that we learn that these members are not coming back into our midst again. I think, although I am not certain, that the hon. member for Beaconsfield is the oldest of those friends, and I want to say that, as far as they are concerned, I do not think there is anyone here, however much we have fought them as ah Opposition, as enemies in the good sense of opponents, who will not think back with pleasure to all the struggle there has been, knowing and feeling that it was a fight of difference of opinion, but in no sense one at the bottom of which there was any feeling of enmity. That we all feel, and now that they are being elevated, are going out of the battle ground they have been in so long, causes us to wish them everything that can contribute to their happiness with the assurance that they will always have our friendship, the best of our friendship, and that we shall always look back with pleasure to the lead, and, I might say, to the chastisement also, because there is no doubt that, although we have sometimes like children got a little angry at what was said, and the chastisement that was received, we, nevertheless, always afterwards felt that it was a good thing that we had shaken each other by the neck a little as long as there was no enmity intended. With these few words I want to assure them on behalf of this side of the House that they, with our other friends—I understand that the hon. member for Dundee (Sir Thomas Watt) will not come back—that we wish them in the best sense of the words, “All good luck.” There are so many other hon. members who possibly think that the same lot may one of these days be theirs, and they will know that they can meet that day with the protest that their friends in the past, or rather their opponents in the past, will wish them everything of the best. I should like to say that that is the feeling of this side of the House, and I wanted to address these few words to them on behalf of this side. Then I wish to take the opportunity to say a few words about you, Mr. Speaker. We are entering upon a general election and the chances of that event are so great that no one knows what may happen, but as far as this side of the House is concerned, I want to say that we feel that we have had a man in the Chair who has set himself to maintain the dignity of the House and to carry out his duties in an impartial manner towards all sections in the House. Unless I err, this is very much appreciated, not only on this side, but also by hon. members opposite. I do not, however, want to speak for the other side, because the leader of the Opposition will say a few words about it. I can only hope that when the time comes that your seat is taken by another that there will be the same efforts on the part of the Chair with the same good results which have been made during the last five years and before by the Chair. However much we may sometimes have wished that we had not done or said something, we always felt that owing to the great influence exercised by the Speaker’s Chair there was always an inward desire in all members of the House to see that the dignity of the House was never lowered. I am convinced that we are indebted for that to you, for what you have done during the last five years, and also to your predecessors. Whatever the chances of the election may be, I hope that your recollections of the time when you were Speaker will be pleasant. Be assured of it that when we have sinned against the Chair and against you, it was not through a desire to do so, but because we were possibly a little too warm for a moment. I can assure you that we always regretted doing something which did not become the best traditions of the House and of the Chair.

I second the motion.

May I add a word on behalf of members of the Labour party. We have had many a battle with the right hon. gentleman opposite, and would like to say how very glad we are that he is able to be here to-day, so that we can tender him our very hearty and most sincere regret at the reason that he is, unfortunately, not going to be in the next Parliament. We earnestly hope that he may have an early recovery, and that we may see him here again some day. As for my hon. friend the member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), on the eve of a general election one is reminded of the words: “Few may meet where many part,” but I do not know what members of the new Parliament are going to do without that watchdog. I do not know who is going to be the chartered libertine of the next House. The hon. member has been an able successor to Mr. Merriman. The place of the hon. member will be very hard to fill in any assembly, and we all hope that he may thoroughly enjoy the rest he promises himself.

He won’t get it.

I should like to see him come back to this House. I feel certain that in the next Parliament the House will be surprised by the hon. member walking in and getting straight upon his feet. I wish to add a word to what the Prime Minister said as to our very great pleasure at seeing the right hon. gentleman here in his place, so that we may, in person, congratulate him on the long service he has done to Parliament, and express our earnest hope that he will recover his health.

I join with the Prime Minister in paying a tribute to the way you, sir, have discharged the duties of the Chair you have occupied for the last five years. It is a difficult position, and you have done your best to hold the scales of justice and fairness evenly in respect of all parties. We have felt it, and we have bowed to your ruling, because we have always felt that your desire was to do equal justice to all sides of the House. We have often been told that the Assembly of the Union is one of the most dignified political assemblies in the British empire. I should like to believe that that is so. It is due very largely to the succession of Speakers we have had, men who have filled that great Chair that you fill today, and we hope that in years to come the great tradition will be kept up both in the Chair and in this House, and that this House will always remain to the country an example of decorum and of dignified bearing, and of always remembering that we stand for the affairs of the nation and not for individual interests in this assembly. It was a gracious act of the Prime Minister to pay a tribute to some of my hon. friends on this side of the House who are retiring from Parliament. Theirs, in many ways, is a happy lot—they are retiring voluntarily—some of us will have to retire involuntarily. I speak with feeling when I refer to the parting which has to come between this House and my right hon. friend the member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt), the father of this House—a man who has occupied a great position in the public life of this country for more than a generation. I do not think there is a more striking instance in our public life of self-sacrifice and self-effacement than that of my right hon. friend. For the good of South Africa he has effaced himself more than any other man in our public life. He leaves this House with this proud record—that he has never done anything for himself, without any blot on his escutcheon and with his high honour untarnished. He leaves a record which every present or future member of Parliament may follow with safety. I part with him with the deepest feeling. I know what I have had in him as a colleague for many years. I never wish to have a more faithful friend or colleague or one who is more loyal in all his endeavours on behalf of the common cause. Some of my other hon. friends, the hon. members for Dundee (Sir Thomas Watt), Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), Beaconsfield (Col. Sir David Harris), Durban (Berea) (Mr. Henderson), and others are leaving us. We feel that during their lifetime of public service they have rendered valuable services to the people of this country. The hon. members for Fort Beaufort, Cape Town (Central) and Dundee were members of the National Convention—they are among the fathers of South Africa, and helped to forge that great instrument with which South Africa has been shaping her fate for the last twenty years. It is sad to think that in the passage of time these men have to leave us, but they have done great service, and they depart with the consciousness of having set an example which younger members and the coming generation well may follow. I wish to thank them for the most loyal support they have given me, and I only hope that the younger men who are pushing—as they should push—to the front in our public life, will show as keen a desire to serve the public interests with as high a spirit, and will leave such a fine record as the older men who are leaving us to-day. It is sad to think that there will be this gap in our ranks. I believe in South Africa, old and young. I believe there will always be those who will take the place of those who have fallen out, and that they will live up to the high standards which the older members have established, that they will see that South Africa will maintain an elevated standard of public life, and will do their best to uphold the traditions of our civilization. I have every faith in the younger generation, and I am sure these older friends now leaving us will give their sincere blessing to the younger men who will take their place.

I wish to thank the Prime Minister and the leader of the Opposition for the very generous terms in which they have spoken of me this afternoon. I am very much indebted to all the members of the House without exception for the generous way in which they have always accepted the rulings that I have given from time to time, and the way in which they have always treated me in the high position I have occupied these last five years. I also wish to thank the Clerk and all the members of his staff for the loyal and faithful way in which they have supported me in the difficult duties I have had to perform.

I would like to thank the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence and my leader for the kind remarks they have made with regard to myself and also the whole House for the sympathetic manner in which they have received them. I regret that, under doctor’s orders and having regard to the state of my health, it is impossible for me adequately t-o reply and express my thanks, but I feel it very deeply.

I would like to say a few words. In the first place, I want to thank the Prime Minister very cordially and also my leader for the way in which they have spoken of me. I also feel very much indebted to members for the very cordial feeling they have always extended towards me right through and on both sides of the House. I also wish to thank you, sir, for the considerate way in which you have always treated me, although I have been very trying at times.

It might be thought that I was wanting in appreciation if I did not thank the Prime Minister and the Minister of Railways and my leader for the very kind expressions they have used with regard to the small services I have been able to render to the country. I have been in Parliament now for 32 years, and during that time we have had five different Speakers and seven different Prime Ministers. I shall leave this House with the greatest regret. I am leaving the House because I have had the painful experience of seeing two distinguished men spending their declining years in Parliaments—I allude to Sir Gordon Sprigg and Mr. Merriman. Although I cannot emulate their ability, I do not wish to exceed their record with regard to the length of time they spent in the House. I shall take away from this House the most pleasant memories of the friends I have made. I have endeavoured to make no enemies, and the kind expressions made this afternoon convinced me that I have in some degree, succeeded in that. I am a South African, I was married in South Africa, my children were married in South Africa, and my grandchildren were married in South Africa. My great grandchildren were born in South Africa, and I hope to die in South Africa. Once again let me thank members of this hon. House for the kindness they have always shown me. I do not think I have taken up the time of the House unduly, and I shall carry away with me very pleasant memories of my associations with hon. members, and of friends I have made here.

I would also like to return thanks for the kind words of the Prime Minister and of my right hon. leader in regard to my services during the 19 years I have been in this Parliament. I cannot speak of such a long record as some other hon. members have. I have made many friends I would otherwise not have made, if I had not been here, and it is to my great regret that I pass away from the parliamentary arena. I may sometimes have made myself obnoxious, and the Prime Minister no doubt remembers one occasion when I had to withdraw certain remarks I had made regarding him. I thank you all, hon. gentlemen, and I hope the next Parliament will be as good as this.

I move—

I only wish to add that it is understood that we shall not meet again, although we are adjourning until to-morrow. The proclamation proroguing Parliament will be issued to-morrow.

seconded.