ZA HANSARDS

→ House of Assembly → 1925 → JUNE, 1925 → House of Assembly: Vol5 - TUESDAY 30 JUNE 1925

« Previous Debate

Next Debate »

House of Assembly: Vol5 - TUESDAY 30 JUNE 1925

TUESDAY, 30th JUNE, 1925.

Mr. SPEAKER took the Chair at 2.20 p.m.

SELECT COMMITTEE ON CROWN LANDS.

The MINISTER OF LANDS laid upon the Table—

Papers relating to:

(100) Proposed elimination of certain condition in title deed of western half of Kerk Plein, Vryburg.
(101) Proposed leasing of sites on Crown land adjoining farms “Dwarskersenbosch” and “Bokkeram,” Piquetberg.
(102) Proposed disposal of portion of Sundays River Settlement, Uitenhage.
(103) Proposed leasing of portions of farm “Rodeheuvel,” Rhynsdorp.
(104) Proposed exchange of two pieces of land at Formosa, Knysna.
(105) Proposed out of hand allotment certain land at Umfolozi to lessee of Lot K.66, Kwambonambi.
(106) Proposed out of hand allotment certain land at Umfolozi to lessee of Lot K.69, Kwambonambi.
(107) Proposed reduction of valuation of Beaufort Settlement, Vryheid.
(108) Proposed reduction of farms Crystal Waters, Fairlea, Hopevale and Lochinvar, Ixopo.
(109) Proposed sale out of hand of farm Uitspanning, Rouxville.

Papers referred to Select Committee on Crown Lands.

QUESTIONS. Railway Men’s Hours, Natal North Coast. I. Mr. STRACHAN

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours whether it is correct that a circular has been issued from the Railway Headquarters, Durban, to several stations on the Natal North Coast informing the staff that “the hours of duty at your station are twelve, less two for meals, per diem. If owing to the exigencies of the service it is not possible to take the time off for meals, the time cannot be paid for. Overtime can only be paid for after twelve hours of duty”; and if so, why this departure from the regulation hours of duty schedule has been made?

The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND HARBOURS:

In connection with the recent appointment of additional foremen at certain stations on the Natal North Coast line, instructions have been given that the hours of duty to be observed will be on the same basis as the shifts worked by foremen at similar stations in Natal and elsewhere. At most of the stations referred to twelve-hour shifts are in operation with two meal hours, but it is not always practicable for meal hours to be taken at regular intervals. It depends entirely on the exigencies of the traffic. Overtime is not, however, allowed until after the completion of the normal period of duty.

Limpopo River Bridge and Railway. II. Mr. HAY

asked the Minister of Railways and Harbours:

(1) Whether the Government of Southern Rhodesia has intimated its willingness to pay half the cost of a railway bridge over the Limpopo River if the Union will extend its line from Messina; and, if so,
(2) what is the position regarding any such proposals?

The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND HARBOURS:

A proposal was submitted on behalf of the Government of Southern Rhodesia on the lines mentioned by the hon. member, but the Union Government is unable to see its way to agree to the proposal at the present time. I may add that the Union Government was subsequently asked whether it would agree to the Government of Southern Rhodesia constructing a bridge at its own cost over the Limpopo River, and in this proposal the Union Government has expressed its agreement.

Dumping Duty on Wheat. III. Mr. GIOVANETTI

asked the Minister of Finance:

(1) in what months during 1924, was a dumping duty on imported wheat actually imposed and collected;
(2) what was the amount of the dumping duty per unit, (i.e., per sack, bag, or 100 lbs., as the case may be) in each month in which a dumping duty was collected; and
(3) what was the total amount collected from dumping duty on wheat during 1924?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

(1) In every month.
(2) The dumping duty per 100 lbs. was in January, 0.42d.; February, 0.33d.; March, 1.02d.; April, 0.93d.; May, 0.29d.; June, 0.85d.; July, 3.17d.; August, 3.57d.: September, 6.00cl.; October, 3.31d.; November, 4.06d.; December, 3.67d.
(3) £24,476.

Officer Commanding Troops at Roberts Heights. IV. Mr. CONROY

asked the Minister of Defence:

(1) Whether he is aware (a) that the present officer commanding the troops at Roberts Heights (Col. Burne) was previously transferred from Roberts Heights because he was not suitable, and (b) that on being transferred back to Roberts Heights in January, 1925, he was promoted from Major to Lieutenant-Colonel and shortly afterwards to Colonel;
(2) why, seeing that the regulations require that all ranks, officers included, must pass a prescribed examination before promotion, this was not done in his case;
(3) whether he is aware that the said officer (a) knows only English, whereas 95 per cent. of his subordinates speak Afrikaans, and (b) that the said officer is in command of the artillery and machine-gun divisions and that he has no knowledge of either of these arms?

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE:

(1) (a) No. (b) No. The officer named was promoted to rank of Lieut.-Colonel and was only granted the temporary rank of Colonel (without pay).
(2) The promotion of this officer did not constitute a departure from Regulations.
(3) (a) Colonel Burne is not bilingual. The proportion is incorrect—75 per cent. of the members of the Force are Dutch-speaking South Africans, of whom the great majority have no difficulty with the other language, (b) Colonel Burne is a qualified machine-gun officer. It is not possible for the officer commanding a mixed force to be a technical expert in all arms of the service, and I am quite satisfied that the officer referred to is a competent officer to command the Force.

Scales Assize, Supercharge on. V. Maj. BALLANTINE

asked the Minister of Mines and Industries:

(1) Whether he will not consider the advisability of reducing the supercharge of 25 per cent. for assizing scales where it is found that same is more than sufficient to cover the expenses this charge is intended to meet, and, if so, whether he will have the regulations amended accordingly; and
(2) whether there is any regulation exempting the Railway Administration from having its scales assized, and, if not, why are its scales not being done, seeing that the general public have to pay railway rates on goods weighed on these scales?

The MINISTER OF MINES AND INDUSTRIES:

(1) As regards the first part of the hon. member’s question, I will look into the question of reducing the supercharge of 25 per cent. mentioned by him, and will communicate with him later as to what can be done.
(2) There is no regulation exempting the Railway Administration. The Department is in communication at present with the Administration, and I understand that the latter is giving the question special attention.

Native Reserves, Encroachments on. VI. Mr. PEARCE

asked the Minister of Native Affairs:

(1) Whether the Government will give an assurance that areas set aside for natives will not be subjected to encroachments as permitted in the past, both in regard to the larger reserves and to smaller areas in the vicinity of towns and villages throughout the Union; and
(2) whether an increase of such reserves and areas which have become congested and therefore inadequate for the maintenance of the occupants in health and comfort will, where practicable, be made?

The MINISTER OF NATIVE AFFAIRS:

(1) The Government exercises continual vigilance to guard against any encroachment on land set aside for Natives, which, indeed, is for the most part entrenched by the terms of Act 27 of 1913.
(2) When circumstances required, land has been purchased by Government to meet the imperative needs of Natives. During the current year there will be a considerable sum on the Estimates for similar purposes.

Mr. H. Oost, M.L.A., and his Mission to Europe. VII. Mr. MARWICK

asked the Minister of Agriculture:

(1) Upon what date is Mr. H. Oost, M.L.A., to sail for Europe;
(2) what amount has been, or is to be, paid by Government in respect of his steamship fare to Europe and back to South Africa;
(3) what amount has been or is to be advanced to Mr. Oost for payment of his travelling expenses;
(4) from what date is the Government responsible for the refund of Mr. Oost’s reasonable out-of-pocket expenses;
(5) whether it is correct that he is to be allowed the refund of expenses up to three guineas per diem, plus steamship and rail fares; and
(6) upon what duty was Mr. Oost engaged in South Africa from the 12th June, 1925, to the 28th June, 1925, and from what Vote was his remuneration paid, and at what rate?

The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND HARBOURS:

As indicated in my reply to the hon. member on the 16th June, Mr. Oost, M.L.A., is proceeding to Europe, and has voluntarily undertaken while there to attend at the British Empire Exhibition for the purpose of assisting in publicity work. He will also make enquiries and investigations in Great Britain and on the Continent for the benefit of the agricultural and industrial communities with a view to extending the marketing of South African products overseas. Mr. Oost’s itinerary is in his own discretion. It is understood he will sail for Europe by the mail steamer leaving this week. The cost of Mr. Oost’s steamship fares to Europe and back to South Africa will not be directly borne by the Central Government, but the agricultural committee which is a sub-committee of the British Empire Exhibition (Union) will bear the cost of these fares. Mr. Oost will also be reimbursed out-of-pocket subsistence expenses up to three guineas per diem, plus actual expenditure on railway fares, etc. These expenses will be apportioned between the agricultural committee and the publicity vote of the railways and harbours administration. The enquiries which Mr. Oost has undertaken commenced on the 12th instant, and between that date and the date of sailing from South Africa, Mr. Oost has been engaged in preliminary investigation work in connection with the enquiries he has undertaken overseas. During this period his expenses up to an amount not exceeding £2 0s. 6d. per diem will be reimbursed by the railways and harbours administration, and will form a debit to the publicity vote. Whilst at sea Mr. Oost will be reimbursed out-of-pocket expenses up to an amount not exceeding 10s. 6d. per diem, which will form a charge to the agricultural committee. No advances have been directly made by the central government or the railway administration to Mr. Oost. I understand, however, he has received an advance from the agricultural committee of the British Empire Exhibition Committee.

Mr. MARWICK:

Arising out of the Minister’s reply, could he tell us what amount has been advanced to the hon. member, and how long South Africa is to have the seemingly priceless privilege of being represented by the hon. member overseas.

The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND HARBOURS:

In reply, I must refer the hon. member to the committee concerned.

Brig.-Gen. BYRON:

We would be glad if the Minister would tell us what are the qualifications in agricultural and industrial matters of this emissary of the Government.

Mr. ROUX:

What a petty spirit to be shown by such a member.

Permanent Force Officers, Senior Rankinc, of. VIII. Brig.-Gen. BYRON

asked the Minister of Defence whether it is the fact that regulations have been drafted or are being prepared providing inter alia that an officer of the Permanent Force holding local or temporary rank will within the limits of his district be senior to officers of the Active Citizen Force, etc., in that area who hold similar substantive rank?

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE:

Yes, certain revised draft regulations for the Coast Garrison and Active Citizen Forces have been prepared and will shortly be submitted for discussion at a conference of senior officers. Thereafter the regulations will be considered by me.

Brig.-Gen. BYRON:

Arising out of that answer it is not clear if these regulations contemplate the changes outlined in my question.

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE:

Until the question appeared on the paper I was not aware of the regulations being prepared. In the ordinary course regulations such as this are drafted, are submitted to various branches of the department, and when they are being considered they are then put to me. The contemplated regulations are something in the sense of the hon. member’s question; but they have not yet come before me for confirmation.

SOUTH-WEST AFRICA CONSTITUTION BILL.

Leave was granted to the Prime Minister to introduce the South-West Africa Constitution Bill.

Bill brought up and read a first time; second reading on Thursday.

TAXATION PROPOSALS. The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I move—

That the Committee of Ways and Means have leave to consider the amendments of items of the proposed Customes Tariff as printed on pages 830-831 of the Votes and Proceedings. Mr. BRINK

seconded.

Agreed to.

NATIVE LANDS (NATAL AND TRANSVAAL) RELEASE BILL.

First Order read: Second reading, Native Lands (Natal and Transvaal) Release Bill.

The MINISTER OF NATIVE AFFAIRS:

I move—

That the Bill be now read a second time.

I wish to move the second reading of this Bill. It is one of those ordinary routine Bills, practically, that come before the House every year, to confirm certain transactions between the Government and the native trust, from time to time, in the exchange of lands or the purchase, some times, of lands which have to be transferred either to the trust or to the name of the Government. I may say that this Bill, with the exception of Clause 12, was referred last year to the Select Committee, and passed by them, but unfortunately Parliament was dissolved and it has to be referred once more to the Select Committee. I move that the second reading be now taken.

Motion put and agreed to.

Bill read a second time and referred to the Select Committee on Native Affairs for consideration and report.

TAXATION PROPOSALS.

Second Order read: House to resume in Committee of Ways and Means.

House in Committee:

[Progress reported on 25th June; native taxation proposals agreed to; Chairman stated the instruction to the Committee on customs taxation proposals.]

Customs Duties.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I move—

This Committee recommends that there shall be charged, levied and collected for the benefit of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, subject to any rebates and conditions which may be provided, or any arrangement made, under the authority of an Act to be passed during the present session of Parliament or of any law relating to the management of the customs, customs duties in respect of goods imported into the Union according to the tariff set out hereunder, which shall be in substitution for the tariff of customs duties at present in force in respect of goods so imported. TARIFF OF CUSTOMS DUTIES.

Class I.—Animals, Agricultural and Pastoral Products and Foodstuffs.

	Present Duty.							Proposed Duty.
		Duty.			Rebate.				Minimum Tariff, Special.			Maximum Tariff. General.
1. Animals, living:—		£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.		£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.
(a) Cattle for slaughter	each	1	10	0		—		each	1	10	0	1	10	0
(b) Sheep for slaughter	each	0	5	0		—		each	0	5	0	0	5	0
(c) Mules and geldings	each	1	0	0		—		each	1	0	0	1	0	0
(d) Bred in South Africa imported overland, not being for slaughter		Free							Free			Free
(e) Other	—	Free				—		—	Free			Free
2. Baking powder	ad valorem	20%				3%		per lb. or ad valorem	0	0	4	0	0	4
2. Baking powder	ad valorem	20%				3%		per lb. or ad valorem	30%			30%
3. Biscuits, bread, cakes, puddings and pastry	ad valorem	25%				3%		whichever duty shall be the greater.
								ad valorem	25%			25%
4. Bones, feathers, ivory, hoofs, horns, shells, skins, teeth, wool and other parts of animals, fishes or reptiles, not being manufactured, polished or further prepared than dried or cleaned, but in their raw and unmanufactured state		Free							Free			Free
5. Butter	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2¼
6. Butterine and butter substitutes, margarine, ghee, compound lard, cottolene, nuttose, and similar substances for use as food or for cooking	per lb.	0	0	3¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	3½	0	0	4
7. Casein: in bulk..	—	Free				—		—	Free			Free
8. Cheese:—
(a) made from milk or cream, from which no fat has been abstracted, and to which no animal or vegetable fat has been added	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	ad valorem or per lb.	25%			30%
									0	0	3½	0	0	4
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(b) Other	per lb.	0	0	6	—			ad valorem.	25%			25%
								ad valorem.	and in addition
								per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
9. Chicory root, raw or dried only..	per lb.	0	0	2		—		per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2
10. Chicory and substitutes for coffee or chicory	per lb.	0	0	4				per lb.	0	0	4	0	0	4
11. Chillies and turmeric:—
(a) Chillies, dried	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2
(b) Turmeric, ground	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2
(c) Turmeric, unground	per lb.	0	0	0¼	0	0	0¼	—	Free			Free
12. Cocoa:—
(a) Beans, raw	—	Free				—		—	Free			Free
(b) Nibs and shells	per lb.	0	0	1		—		per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1
(c) Mass, paste or slab, unsweetened; block chocolate, unsweetened; and cocoa butter	per lb.	0	0	1½		—		per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2
(d) Other unsweetened; cocoa mixed with milk or other food substances, except sugar	per lb.	0	0	2				per lb.	0	0	2½	0	0	2½
		or 10% ad valorem				3%
(e) Sweetened cocoa, block chocolate (couverture) sweetened for use in the confectionery manufacturing industry	per lb.	0	0	3½	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	3
13. Coffee
(a) Raw	per lb.	0	0	0¾		—		per lb.	0	0	0¾	0	0	0¾
(b) Roasted or ground	per lb.	0	0	2		—		per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2
(c) Mixed	per lb.	0	0	3		—		per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	3
14. Confectionery:—
(a) Slab chocolate: plain, milk, nut or fruit	per lb. or ad valorem.	0	0	3½	0	0	0¼	per lb. or ad valorem	0	0	4	0	0	4
		30%			3%				30%			30%
(b) Plain or fancy of all kinds, compounded, made or preserved with sugar; sweetened cocoa or chocolate, n.e.e.; sweetmeats; crystallized fruits, candied or preserved ginger (not being for manufacturing purposes) and chow-chow; bon-bons, surprise packets and crackers	per lb. or ad valorem	0	0	3½	0	0	0¼	per lb. or ad valorem	0	0	3½	0	0	3½
		30%			3%				35%			35%
(Not including medicinal preparations properly classed as apothecaryware.)								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(c) Ginger for manufacturing purposes, preserved in syrup or brine: in packages of not less than 100 lbs. net weight	per lb.	0	0	3½	0	0	0¼		0	0	1½	0	0	1½
15. Corn and grain (not including infants’ foods, patent or proprietary foods, or corn or grain prepared as vegetables):—
(a) Wheat:
(i) in the grain	per 100 lbs.	0	1		0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	1	0	0	1	2
(ii) ground or otherwise prepared	per 100 lbs.	0	3	3	0	0	4	per 100 lbs.	0	2	11	0	3	3
(iii) bran, wheaten	per 100 lbs.	0	1	2	0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	1	0	0	1	2
(b) Barley, buckwheat, kaffir corn, millet, oats and rye:
(i) in the grain or raw	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	2	0
(ii) ground, malted or otherwise prepared	per 100 lbs.	0	2	9	0	0	3	per 100 lbs.	0	2	9	0	3	0
(c) Maize:
(i) in the grain	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	2	0
(ii) samp	per 100 lbs.	0	2	9	0	0	3	per 100 lbs.	0	2	6	0	2	9
(iii) ground or otherwise prepared	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1¼
(a) Rice in the grain	per 100 lbs.	0	1	0	—			per 100 lbs.	0	1	0	0	1	0
16. Cream of tartar	ad valorem	20%			3%			per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	3
17. Eggs:
(a) in the shell	per lb.	0	0	1	—			per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1
(b) whole or part contents, liquid or dried	ad valorem	20%			3%			per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	3
18. Extracts and essences of all kinds for food or flavouring, n.e.e., including concentrated soup	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
19 Fish:—
(a) Fry and ova	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Fresh, dried, cured or salted of South African taking	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(c) Caviare, lax, lobster and anchovies	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	ad valorem	20%			25%
(d) Fish pastes, potted or tinned	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	3
(e) Other	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1¼
20. Fodder:—Chaff, hay, lucerne, oat- hay, oil-cake, and other fodder, n.e.e.	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	1	10	0	2	0
21. Foods:—
(a) Specially prepared for infants	—	Various			—			ad valorem	15%			15%
(b) Patent or proprietary farinaceous and cereal foods, including maizena, but not including oatmeal and rolled oats	—	Various			—			ad valorem	20%			25%
22. Fruits:—
(a) Fresh or green	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
(b) Bottled, tinned or otherwise preserved, except crystallized fruits; but including pulp and candied peel	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2¼
(c) Dates:—(1) in bulk	per lb.	0	0	0½	—			per lb.	0	0	0½	0	0	0½
(2) in cartons	per lb.	0	0	0½	—			per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1
(d) Dried, of all kinds, not including dates and nuts	per lb.	0	0	2½	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2¼
23. Gelatine, animal or vegetable
(a) not in bulk	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem plus a suspended duty of	Free 15%			5% 15%
24. Glue: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem plus a suspended duty of	Free 10%			5% 10%
25. Hair:—Horsehair or other animal hair not being further prepared than dyed, dried or cleaned.	ad valorem	3% and free			3%			—	Free			Free
26. Hops: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
27. Jams, jellies and honey; pudding, cake and jelly powders	per lb.	0	0	2½	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2½	0	0	2½
		or 25% ad valorem			3%			or ad valorem whichever duty shall be the greater	30%			30%
28. Lard and edible meat fats	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	1¼	per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1¼
29. Macaroni, spaghetti and vermicelli	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
30. Meats, soups (not concentrated) and similar substances used as food, but not including extracts and essences:—
(a) Bacon and ham	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	3
(b) All other	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	1¼	per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1¼
31. Meat pastes, potted or tinned	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	3
32. Milk (including cream), condensed, dessicated or preserved:—
(a) Full cream	per 100 lbs.	0	10	4	0	2	0	per 100 lbs.	0	8	4	0	10	5
								plus a suspended duty of per 100 lbs.	0	2	1	0	2	1
(b) Skimmed or separated	per lb.	0	0	6	—			per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
33. Nuts, edible:—
(a) Coconuts, whole	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
(b) Coconuts, desiccated, unsweetened	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(c) Coconut, desiccated, sweetened	per lb.	0	0	3½	0	0	0¼	ad valorem	30%			35%
(d) Other, n.e.e.	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2¼
34. Onions and garlic, not preserved	per lb.	0	0	0½	—	per lb.	0	0	0½	0	0	0½
35. Peas and beans and other leguminous seeds not elsewhere provided for, including ground nuts:
(a) Dried	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	1	10	0	2	0
(b) Ground or otherwise prepared	per 100 lbs.	0	2	9	0	0	3	per 100 lbs.	0	2	6	0	2	9
(c) Preserved as a vegetable	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
36. Pickles:—
(a) Pickles, sauces, chutneys and other condiments	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2¼
(b) Soy, in packages containing over 10 gallons, and of weight not less than 13 ½ lbs. to the imperial gallon, when imported by manufacturers of condiments	per lb.	0	0	1¼	—			per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	1¼
37. Potatoes, not preserved	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	0	0	2	per 100 lbs.	0	1	10	0	2	0
38. Rennet	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
39. Salt:—Table, rock, dairy and common	ad valorem	20%			3%			per 100 lbs.	0	0	9	0	0	9
								or ad valorem	20%			20%
								whichever duty shall be the greater
40. Seeds, bulbs, plants, trees and tubers; for planting and sowing only, not including those ordinarily used for food or fodder	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
41. Spices:—
(a) Not ground or crushed	per lb.	0	0	0¼	0	0	¼	per lb.	Free			0	0	0¼
(b) Other	per lb.	0	0	2¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2¼
42. Starch:—
(a) Potato farina, imported by confectioners for moulding or dusting sweets	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad alorem	Free			3%
(b) Other	per lb.	0	0	1	—			per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1
43. Sugar and sugar substitutes:—
(a) Candy, loaf, castor, icing and cube sugar	per 100 lbs.	0	6	0	—			per 100 lbs.	0	6	0	0	6	0
(b) Others kinds of sugar, including golden and maple syrup, molasses, saccharum, glucose and treacle	per 100 lbs.	0	4	6	—			per 100 lbs.	0	3	6	0	4	6
(c) Saccharine and other similar sweetening substances, and materials capable of conversion into such substances	per lb.	1	0	0	—			per lb.	1	0	0	1	0	0
Note.—In the case of sugar upon which bounties are granted in the country of origin, an additional duty equal to the amount of each bounty is to be levied.
44. Tapioca, sago and arrowroot	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
45. Tea:—
(a) In packets or tins, not ex exceeding 10 lbs. each in weight	per lb.	0	0	6	—			per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
(b) In larger containers	per lb.	0	0	4	—			per lb.	0	0	4	0	0	4
46. Vegetables:—
(a) Fresh or green, but not including potatoes, onions or garlic	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			Free
(b) Tinned or otherwise preserved	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
47. Vinegar, per gallon of any strength, not exceeding 6 per cent, by weight of acetic acid:—
(a) In bottles or vessels of a capacity of not more than one imperial quart	per imperial gallon	0	1	1	0	0	1	per imp. gallon	0	1	0	0	1	0
(b) In larger vessels, or in bulk	per imperial gallon	0	0	7	0	0	1	per imp. gallon	0	0	6	0	0	6
Class II.—Ales, Spirits, Wines and Beverages.
48. (a) Ale, beer, cider and perry: all kinds of strength, exceeding 3 per cent, of proof spirit	per imp. gallon	0	2	9	0	0	6	per imp. gallon	0	2	9	0	2	9
(b) Stout exceeding 3 per cent. of proof spirit		0	2	9	0	0	6		0	2	3	0	2	3
49. Beverages:—
(a) Fruit juices, cordials and syrups, n.e.e.	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(b) Other kinds, n.e.e. and not exceeding 3 per cent. of proof spirit	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
50. Spirits:—
(a) Perfumed	per imp. galloon	1	19	0	—			per imp. gallon	1	19	0	1	19	0
	(and in addition 25% ad valorem.)							(and in addition 25% ad valorem.)
(b) Liqueurs, cordials and mixed potable spirits, exceeding 3 per cent. of proof spirit	per imp. galloon	1	18	6	—			per imp. gallon	1	18	6	1	18	6
	(or 25% ad valorem whichever duty shall be the greater.)							(or 25% ad valorem whichever duty shall be the greater.)
(c) Other potable spirits, exceeding 3 per cent. of proof spirit	per imp. proof galloon	1	17	6	—			per imp. proof gallon	1	17	6	1	17	6
No allowance will be made for under proof in excess of 15 per cent.]
(d) Medicinal and toilet preparations and essences (liquid), syrups and tinetures: containing over 3 percent, of proof spirit, and including those made from wine	per imp. galloon	1	18	6	—			per imp. gallon	1	18	6	1	18	6
	(or 25% ad valorem whichever duty shall be the greater.)							(or 25% ad valorem whichever duty shall be the greater.)
[Such spirits if and when overproof shall be specially entered and the strength overproof declared, and the duty on the mixture shall then be leviable at £1 17s. 6d., per imperial proof gallon, or 25 per cent. ad valorem, whichever duty shall be the greater.]
(e) Collodion and iodiser, containing over 3 per cent. of proof spirit	per imp. proof galloon	1	17	6	—			per imp. proof gallon	1	17	6	1	17	6
No allowance will be made for under proof in excess of 15 per cent.]
(f) Methylated spirits, and solidified alcohol for burning purposes, containing over 3 per cent. of proof spirit	per imp. proof galloon	1	17	6	—			per imp. proof gallon	1	17	6	1	17	6
(g) Wood naphtha and methyl alcohol	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
51. Waters: mineral, aerated and table:—
(a) In bottles containing each not more than ¾ reputed pint	per doz. bottles	0	0	9	—			per doz. bottles.	0	0	9	0	0	9
(b) In bottles containing each more than ¾ reputed pint and not more than 1½ reputed pints	per doz. bottles	0	1	0	—			per doz. bottles.	0	1	0	0	1	0
(c) In larger size bottles or other containers	per imp. gallon	0	1	0	—			per imp. gallon	0	1	0	0	1	0
52. Wines:—
(a) Still wines, not exceeding 20 per cent. of proof spirit	per imp. gallon	0	4	0	—			per imp. gallon	0	4	0	0	4	0
(b) Still wines, exceeding 20 per cent. of proof spirit, but not exceeding 50 per cent.	per imp. gallon	0	8	0	—			per imp. gallon	0	8	0	0	8	0
(c) Sparkling wines	per imp. gallon	0	12	6	—			per imp. gallon	0	12	6	0	12	6
	(and in addition 15% ad valorem on all the above classes of wine)							(and in addition 15% ad valorem on all the above classes of wine)
Note.—Wines containing less than 3 per cent. of proof spirit are not included in the above, and wines containing more than 50 per cent. of proof spirit are classed as spirits.
Class III.—Tobacco, and manufactures thereof.
53. Cigars and cigarillos	per lb.	0	8	6	—			per lb.	0	8	6	0	8	6
	(and in addition ad valorem 15%)	—			—			(and in addition ad valorem 15%)				15%
54. Cigarettes	per lb.	0	6	0	—			per lb.	0	6	0	0	6	0
	(and in addition ad valorem 15%)	—			—			(and in addition ad valorem 15%)				15%
55. Goorak, or gooracco, and hookah mixture, and all imitations or substitutes therefor or for tobacco	per lb.	0	6	0	—			per lb.	0	6	0	0	6	0
56. Snuff	per lb.	0	4	0	—			per lb.	0	4	0	0	4	0
57. Tobacco, manufactured	per lb.	0	5	0	—			per lb.	0	5	0	0	5	0
58. Tobacco, unmanufactured	per lb.	0	3	6	—			per lb.	0	3	6	0	3	6
Class IV.—Fibres, Yarns, Textiles and Apparel.
59. Bags and bagging (not including pacer or leather bags):—		£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.		£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.
(a) Bags, n.e.e., for flour, grain, manure, local manufactures and produce, sugar, wool, coal and minerals	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Jute bags, bagging and sacking in the piece	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
								Plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	15%			20%
(c) Linen and cotton bags for salt, flour, sugar, tobacco and other local manufactures	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
								Plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	15%			20%
60. Battery cloth and baize: gauze, matting, sieving and screening, not being of metal, for use in connection with machinery; brattice cloth filter cloth, bolting cloth and milk silk; but not including coconut matting	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
61 Blankets and rugs, shawls n.e.e., sheets commonly used as blankets or rugs and known as Kaffir sheets, and kadungas and similar body-wraps:—
(a) weighing more than 12 ozs. each and imported singly or in pairs or in the piece—
(i) containing 50 per cent or more of cotton	ad valorem	25%			3%			per lb.	0	1	0	0	1	0
								with a maximum of each	0	2	6	0	2	6
								or ad valorem	25%			25%
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(ii) containing less than 50 per cent. of cotton	ad valorem	25%			3%			each	0	2	6	0	2	6
								or ad valorem	25%			25%
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(b) second-hand, for sale	ad valorem	25%			3%			each	0	5	0	0	5	0
(c) blanketting and Kaffir sheeting	ad valorem	15%			3%			per lb.	0	1	0	0	1	0
								or ad valorem	25%			25%
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
62. Candlewick	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
63. Carpets and other floor coverings:
(a) Carpets, floor rugs and mats (other than coir), linoleum and floorcloth, and carpet felt	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) Coir mats and coir matting	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
64. Cheese bandages and caps	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			Free
65. Clothing:—
(a) Bespoke, or made by a tailor or dressmaker to the order of an individual (not including underclothing)	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
(b) Ready-made clothing, including underclothing, n.e.e.	ad valorem	15% or 20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
								plus a suspended duty of
									10%			10%
(c) Shirts, collars and pyjamas of silk or artificial silk or mixtures thereof with any other material	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(d) Second-hand, for sale:
(i) Overcoats	each	0	2	0	—			each	0	3	0	0	3	0
	or ad valorem	25%							up to 30th June, 1926.
								then	0	3	6	0	3	6
									up to 30th June, 1927.
								thereafter	0	4	0	0	4	0
								or	in each case
								ad valorem	25%			25%
									whichever duty shall be the greater.
(ii) Coats, vests, trousers, cloaks, mantles or shawls	each	0	2	0	—			each	0	2	6	0	2	6
	or ad valorem	25%							up to 30th June, 1926.
								then	0	3	0	0	3	0
									up to 30th June, 1927.
								thereafter	0	3	6	0	3	6
								or	in each case
								ad valorem	25%			25%
									whichever duty shall be the greater.
66. Coir, cotton, fibre, flax, flock, grass, hemp, jute and moss: raw, waste and unmanufactured	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
67. Furs: not being raw and unmanufactured skins; including muffs and articles of apparel (except gloves) made from furs	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
68. Gloves: all, except gloves made wholly of rubber and gloves specially constructed for industrial purposes	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	10%			15%
69. Hats and caps:—
(a) New	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(b) Second-hand, for sale	ad valorem	15%			3%			each	0	3	6	0	3	6
70. Hosiery, namely: socks and stockings	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	10%			15%
71. Laces, lace curtaining and flouncing, and embroidery: in the piece or in the form of insertions or medallions	ad valorem	20% or 15%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
72. Leather, imitation; including pegamoid, rexine and similar materials used for upholstering	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
73. Millinery, drapery, haberdashery, and textile articles of furnishing and napery, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
74. Netting (fruit tree)	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
75. Piece goods: Canvas, not less than 8 ozs. in weight per yard of 28½ ins. in width	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
76. Piece goods, not being blanketting or Kaffir sheeting:—
(a) Cotton (that is, piece goods containing 50 per cent. or more of cotton), the free on board price of which per yard—
(i) does not exceed 1s. 3d.	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	10%			15%
(ii) exceeds 1s. 3d.	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	12%			12%
Note.—In the case of piece goods exceeding 30 inches in width, “ yard ” shall mean 36 inches by 30 inches in width, and the price shall be calculated proportionately to the width.
(b) Of wool, cotton or hair, or mixtures thereof, containing less than 50 per cent. of cotton	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
								plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	10%			10%
(c) All other woven or knitted fabrics in the piece, n.e.e.	ad valorem	15% or 20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
77. Quilts, padded	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
78. Rope and cordage:—
(a) For drilling, driving and water-boring	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Other, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
79. Shawls: Cashmere, lace, silk and knitted or crocheted; and other shawls weighing not more than 12 ozs. each	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
80. Threads, yarns, cottons, silks and twists: sewing, knitting and crochet	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	10%			10%
81. Twine:—
(a) Seaming and binding, and harvest yarn	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
								plus a suspended duty on such twines and yarns made from locally grown materials:
								ad valorem	10%			10%
(b) Other	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
Class V.—Metals, Metal Manufactures, Machinery and Vehicles.
82. Airships, aeroplanes, and other aircraft, including completed parts thereof	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
83. Barrages: structural steelwork for, and the equipment directly connected with and essential to the construction of; for irrigation and other water supply purposes	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
84. Baths, metal; and bath, sink and lavatory plugs, washers, wastes and overflows	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
85. Battery shoes and dies	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
86. Bicycles, tricycles, motor cycles and sidecars; including spare parts and accessories, but not electric lamp bulbs, tyres and tubes, when imported separately	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
87. Bolts, nuts, rivets, screws, nails and washers	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
88. Boilers, steam, for industrial purposes, and feed water heaters for the same; and boiler tubes	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
89. Buckets, skips, trucks, and tubs, wheeled or otherwise, for hauling on rails or wires; together with the rails therefor, and metal shaft sets	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
90. Buckets, household and sanitary	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
91. Bullion (in the bar or sheet), coin and specie	ad valorem	Free			—			—	Free			Free
92. Bungs, metal	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
93. Carriages, carts, coaches and wagons:—
(а) New	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(b) Axles, springs, steps and other metal parts, not ordinarily made in the Union	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(c) Finished parts, n.e.e.	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(d) Second-hand	each	10	0	0	—			per vehicle	10	0	0	10	0	0
	ad valorem	plus 15% with a minimum duty of 25% ad valorem.			3%			and in addition 15% ad valorem but in no case shall the duty be less than 25% ad valorem
94. Cash registers and calculating machines	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
95. Chains for hauling	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
96. Chimneys: metal (smoke stacks)	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
97. Cranes, gravity conveyors and shears	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
98. Crown corks and similar stoppers (not being screw stoppers or swing stoppers), made of metal or other material, used alone or in combination with cork or other substances as stoppers for bottles and jars of common glass	per gross	0	0	3	—			per gross	0	0	3	0	0	3
99. Cutlery, not gold or silver, nor gold or silver plated	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
100. Cylinders:—
(a) For use, or used, as containers of oxygen, carbonic acid or other gases under pressure, or of compressed air, (not being parts of acetylene gas lamps)	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(b) Other, and empty metal drums	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
101. Dairy utensils and machinery:—
(a) Milk cans and buckets	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(b) Cheese moulds, tinned	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
(c) Other dairy utensils and machinery	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(d) Metal castings for the manufacture of cow stalls	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
102. Enamelware and hollow-ware n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
103. Engines and motors for fishing and whaling boats and mercantile marine purposes: trawl and whaling winches and trawl nets	ad valorem	20% or 3%			3%			—	Free			Free
104. Fencing material: droppers, gates, hurdles, posts, standards, strainers, staples, stiles, winders and other materials or fastenings of metal ordinarily used for agricultural and railway fencing, but not including wire and wire netting	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
105. Ferro-chrome, ferro-manganese and ferro-silicon: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
106. Filing tab nets, steel	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
107. Filters: being machinery, apparatus and appliances directly connected with and essential to the construction of filtering or water purifying plants, attached to or used in connection with a public water supply system	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
108. Firearms:—
(a) Guns and rifles, including barrels therefor, single, n.e.e.	per barrel	1	0	0	—			per barrel	1	0	0	1	0	0
(b) Guns and rifles, including barrels therefor, double and other	per barrel	0	15	0	—			per barrel	0	15	0	0	15	0
(c) Revolvers and pistols	each	0	5	0	—			each	0	5	0	0	5	0
and in addition in the case of (a), (b) and (c)	ad valorem
	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(d) Gun and rifle furniture		20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(e) Rifles, miniature, of a calibre not exceeding 22, and single-barrelled shot guns of a calibre not exceeding 420	each and	1	0	0	—			each	0	15	0	0	15	0
	ad valorem	15%			3%
109. Fire escapes and fire extinguishing appliances and apparatus	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
110. Furniture:—
(a) Metal bedsteads	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(b) Metal springs for furniture	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(c) Other metal furniture n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
111. Gauze, sieving and screening: of metal, for use in connection with machinery, including copper gauze for dynamo brushes	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
								plus a suspended duty of
									17%			17%
112. Gold and silver leaf	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
113. Hardware n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
114. Horse, mul and donkey shoes	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
115. Lamp bulbs, electric:—
(a) Projector type	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
(b) Radiator type	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(c) Motor and motor cycle headlights	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	10	0
(d) Motor and motor cycle side, tail and dash lights	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	5	0
(e) Flashlights	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	2	6
(f Carbon filament	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	5	0
(g) Vacuum ty e, n.e.e.:Not exceeding 60 watts	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	5	0
Exceeding 60 watts	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	10	0
(h) Gasfilled type, n.e.e.:—
Not exceeding 100 watts	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			0	10	0
Exceeding 100 watts	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100	Free			1	0	0
116. Lamps and lampware:—
(a) Metal parts for the manufacture of acetylene gas lamps	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			Free
(b) Miners safety lamps (except acetylene) and racks therefor	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			Free
(c) Electric hand lamps and torches,	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(d) Other, n.e.e.; including lanterns, but not parts of motor vehicles or cycles	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
117. Lifts and elevator, hydraulic or electrical, including the gates; and lifting jacks	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
118. Machinery, apparatus, appliances and implements (not specially provided for, and not including material, domestic machines of vehicles):—
(a) for agricultural purposes	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) fixed plant and machinery for factory installation	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(c) for mining purposes	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(d) other, for manufacturing and industrial purposes, including machinery for power laundries	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
119. Machinery, apparatus, appliances, implements and electrical material used in connection therewith, for the generation, storage, transmission, distribution of, and lighting by, gas or electric power, but not including acetylene lamps, hand and portable lamps, electric lamp bulbs elsewhere provided for, electric fans, and parts or accessories of motor vehicles or cycles	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
Metals:—
120. Aluminium: in plain, perforated or corrugated sheets, but otherwise unmanufactured, and foil	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
121. Brass, copper and composition metal: in plain or perfora ed sheets, but otherwise unmanufactured	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
122 Iron and Steel:—
(a) In blocks, ingots, pigs, billets, slabs, blooms, and like crude manufactures; and scrap	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(b) Plates and sheets : plain, corrugated, or galvanized, including tinplate, but not including lacquered, enamelled, varnished, printed, lithographed or embossed	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(c) Angle, bar, channel, hoop, rod, H, T, and similar iron or steel, not perforated or put together or worked up in any way, and not specially provided for	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(d) Drill steel	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(e) Tool steel	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(f) Hoop iron and hoop steel, shaped or fashioned for cooperage	ad valorem	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(g) Metal parts of steel window frames	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
123. Lead: sheet and foil	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
124. Tin and zinc: plate and sheet, plain or perforated, but otherwise unmanufactured; not including lacquered, enamelled, varnished, printed, lithographed or embossed plates or sheets; and tin foil	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
125. Zinc: fume, dust and shavings	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
126. Metal of all sorts, other than iron and steel, including brazing and soldering alloys: in rods, bars, blocks, ingots and pigs; and scrap metal, n.e.e.	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
127. Metal sheets:—
(a) printed, lithographed or embossed; including metal badg s, metal name and number plates, and similar articles	ad valorem	2%			3%			ad valorem	15%			25%
(b) lacquered, enamelled and varnished	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
128. Meters, electricity
(a) of less than 50 amperes	ad valorem	3%			3%			each	Free			0	2	6
(b) of 50 amperes, and not exceeding 100	ad valorem	3%			3%			each	Free			0	5	0
(c) exceeding 100 amperes	ad valorem	3%			3%			each	Free			0	10	0
129. Motor cars:—
(a) of a free on board value not exceeding £400	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) of a free on board value exceeding £400 but not exceeding £600	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	22%			22%
(c) of a free on board value exceeding £600	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(d) Second-hand, imported by individuals, and not being for sale	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(e) Chassis, imported for bodies to be built in the Union	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	10%			10%
(f) spare parts and accessories, but not including electric lamp bulbs, tyres and tubes	ad valorem	3% or 20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
130. Motor trucks and motor vans for the conveyance of goods, and trailers for the same, and motor char-a-bancs and omnibuses:—
(a) Complete vehicles, assembled or unassembled	ad valorem	3% or 20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) Chassis, imported for bodies to be built in the Union	ad valorem	20% or 3%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
(c) spare parts and accessories, but not including electric lamp bulbs, tyres and tubes	ad valorem	3% or 20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
131. Packing and lagging for engines, machinery, piping, and buildings	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
132. Perambulators and baby carts	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	10%			10%
133. Pickaxes and shovels	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
134. Pipes, piping, tubes, and fittings, of metal: for gas, steam, drainage, sewerage, irrigation, water supply and water pumping; not including grids, manhole covers and fittings, and surface boxes:—
(a) Wrought iron or steel pipes and tubes, except downpipes and guttering	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100 lbs.	Free			0	1	0
(b) Cast iron pipes and tubes, except downpipes and guttering	ad valorem	3%			3%			per 100 lbs.	Free			0	0	8
(c) Lead piping	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
(d) Downpiping and guttering and fittings therefor	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(e) Cocks and taps, and meters and pipe fittings, n.e.e.	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
(f) Pipes and piping, other	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(g) Cisterns	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(h) Water meters for house connections, not exceeding one inch piping	ad valorem	3%			3%			each	Free			0	3	0
135. Presses: Wool, cotton, hay, straw, forage and wine	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
136. Pumps: water and wine; and water-pumping apparatus, not including pipes or tubes elsewhere provided for	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
137. Quicksilver	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
138. Railway construction or equipment requisites, as follows: rails, sleepers (except wooden), fastenings for rails or sleepers, girders, iron bridge-work, culvert tops, locomotives, tenders, ballast trucks, goods wagons, carriages, trolleys, engine water-tanks, turntables, permanent or fixed signals, weighbridges, and railway lamps	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
139. Refrigerating plant; frigidaire and similar electric refrigerators	ad valorem	20% and 3%			3%			—	Free			Free
140. Sewing and knitting machines, not being industrial machinery	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
141. Sprayers and sprinklers and other apparatus used for the prevention or destruction of agricultural pests, or of diseases in stock, plants or trees	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
142. Steel balls for tube mills	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
143. Stoves:—
(a) Stoves, ranges, coppers, and grates	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) Electrical cooking and heating appliances (including kettles and irons): not being machinery elsewhere provided for	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
144. Tanks:—
(a) Suitable and intended for mining purposes: including vats; and substructures for the same	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(b) Other, of metal	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
145. Telegraphs and telephones: materials and instruments for use in the construction and working of telegraph and telephone lines	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
146. Tools, mechanics’: being tools ordinarily used by mechanics or artizans, and not being agricultural implements or machine tools	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
147. Traction engines, tractors and steam-wagons; stone crushers; steam and motor road-rollers; road scarifiers, street sweeping and street spraying machines; asphalt melting and mixing plant; tar and pitch boilers	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
148. Tramway construction and equipment requisites, namely: rails, sleepers (except wooden), fastenings for rails or sleepers, iron gates, girders, iron bridge-work, culvert tops, cars, trolleys, water-tanks, turntables, and railless cars (electric) worked by current from overhead wires	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
149. Typewriters; duplicating and addressing machines; and numbering and perforating machines, not being for the printing or bookbinding industry	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
150. Water boring apparatus, not including pipes or tubes elsewhere provided for	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
151. Weighing machines, including scales and balances: not being laboratory instruments, or industrial appliances elsewhere provided for	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
152. Wheelbarrows	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
153. Wire:—
(a) Millinery and brass picture wire, and wire made of precious metal	ad valorem	20% or 3%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) Other, except electric	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem plus a ad valorem	Free suspended 10%			3% duty of 15%
154. Wireless telegraphy and telephony instruments and apparatus used in the working thereof	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
155. Wire-netting:—
(а) For fencing, 3 inch mesh	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Woven screen netting for mining purposes	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem plus a ad valorem	Free suspended 17%			3% duty of 17%
(c) All other	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
156. Wire-rope	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
Class VI.—Minerals, Earthenware and Glassware.
157. Asbestos-cement manufactures, namely: plain or corrugated sheets, slates, tiles, ridging and guttering	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
158. Asphalt and bitumen in bulk: provided they are of a standard approved by the Minister	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
159. Barytes and pumice; in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
160. Bottles and jars of common glass or earthenware, being ordinary trade packages for the transport of goods and including fruit jars:—
(a) Imported full of any article liable to a rated duty	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Empty (including bottles and siphons ordinarily used for aerated waters)	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem plus a ad valorem	Free suspended 20%			5% duty of 20%
161. Bricks, except bath	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
162. Cement:—
(a) For building purposes, including hydraulic lime	per 400 lbs.	0	1	3	0	0	3	per 400 lbs.	0	1	0	0	1	3
(b) Liquid, for tube mills	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(c) Other, including roofing and similar prepared adhesive cements	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
163. Coal and patent fuel	per ton of 2,000 lbs.	0	3	0	—			per ton of 2,000 lbs.	0	3	0	0	3	0
164. Coke	per ton of 2,000 lbs.	0	1	0	—			per ton of 2,000 lbs.	0	1	0	0	1	6
165. Crucibles, cupels, cupelling furnaces, ingot moulds, retorts, and furnaces for roasting mine als	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
166. Diamonds and other gems, or precious stones, in their rough state	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
167. Earthenware and stoneware n.e.e. including sanitary pans, urinals, sinks and lavatory basins	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
168. Emery in bulk; emery or carborundum cloth, paper and wheels; sand, glass and flintpaper	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
169. Fireclay, kaolin, china clay and cornish-stone: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
170. Fuller’s earth, not being a toilet preparation: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
171. Glass:—
(a) Illuminated windows, imported by or for presentation to any religious body	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Polished plate—
(i) exceeding 7 sq. ft. in measurement	ad valorem	20%			3%			per sq. ft.	0	0	6	0	0	7
(ii) not exceeding 7 sq. ft (c) Sheet (plain, clear)—	ad valorem	20%			3%			per sq. ft.	0	0	4	0	0	5
(i) exceeding 16 ozs. per sq. ft.	ad valorem	20%			3%			per 100 sq. ft.	0	6	0	0	7	0
(ii) not exceeding 16 ozs. per sq. ft.	ad valorem	20%			3%			per 100 sq. ft.	0	4	0	0	5	0
(d) Bevelled, silvered and other	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(e) Rough optical	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
172. Glassware, chinaware and porcelainware:—
(a) For laboratory use	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Other, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
173. Graphite or plumbago	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
174. Grindstones, millstones and scythestones	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
175. Gypsum (sulphate of lime or plaster of paris): in bulk	ad valorem	Free			Free			ad valorem	Free			3%
176. Iron pyrites: in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
177. Kieselguhr: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
178. Marble:—
(a) In the rough or sawn	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Other, including tombstones	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
179. Meerschaum: in the rough	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
180. Mica manufactures:—
(a) Lamp chimneys and stove fronts	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
(b) Micanite sheets, other	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
181. Pipes, piping and tubes: of earthenware, for drainage, irrigation, sewerage, water supply or water-pumping	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
182. Sculpture (including bronzes, but not including tombstones): being original works of art, or specially made reproductions thereof, modelled separately by an individual artist	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
183. Slates for roofing, n.e.e.	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
184. Stone linings and pebbles, for tube mills	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
185. Thermoscope bars and seger cones	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
186. Tiles, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
187. Vitreous alumino-silicate compositions, or borax glasses with or without colouring or opacifying material	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
Class VII.—Oils, Waxes, Resin, Paints and Varnishes.
188. Amber and amberoid, in the rough	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
189. Antifriction grease	ad valorem	20%			3%			per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	1
180. Candles	per 100 lbs.	0	5	0	0	0	10	per 100 lbs.	0	4	2	0	4	2
191. Copra	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
192. Lead, white:—
(a) Dry	ad valorem	20% and 3%			3%			per 100 lbs.	0	6	0	0	7	0
(b) Ground in oil:
(i) In packages containing 50 lbs. weight or over	ad valorem	20%			3%			per 100 lbs.	0	9	0	0	10	0
(ii) In packages containing less than 50 lbs. weight	ad valorem	20%			3%			per 100 lbs.	0	10	0	0	11	0
193. Litharge	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
194. Manganese resinate; in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
195. Motor spirit, namely: benzine, benzoline, naphtha (non-potable), gasoline, petrol; and petroleum, shale and coal-tar spirit generally	per imp. gallon	in bulk 0 0 2 in tins 0 0 3			—			per imp. gallon	0	0	3	0	0	3
196. Oil, fish: raw, from fish of South African taking	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
197. Oils, essential (natural and synthetic), and perfumed (not being toilet preparations)	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
198. Oils, heavy, for road or pavement construction: in bulk; provided they are of a standard approved by the Minister	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
199. Oils, lubricating:—
(a) In bulk	per imp. gallon	0	0	3	—			per imp. gallon	0	0	3	0	0	3
(b) Not in bulk	per imp. gallon	0	0	3	—			ad valorem	15%			15%
200. Oils, mineral:—
(a) Crude	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(b) illuminating and burning: having a specific gravity of less than 900 at 60° Fahrenheit, and a flash point of not more than 150° Fahrenheit	per imp. gallon	0	0	1	—			per imp. gallon	0	0	1	0	0	1
(c) transformer and transil	ad valorem	3%			3%			per imp. gallon	0	0	1	0	0	1
(d) Other, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
201. Oils, tar and creosote: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
202. Oils, vegetable or animal, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
203. Paints and colours:—
(a) Ready mixed for use; and artists’ colours, enamels, water - paints, distempers, colour-washes, flat oil paints, sheep-marking oils, and petrifying liquids	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(b) Dry pigments, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(c) Colours, ground in oil, not including white lead; and patent driers	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
204. Polishes: floor, furniture, leather, metal and similar polishes and dressings, including blacking but not french polish	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
205. Resin and turpentine:—
(a) Resin (including artificial resin), dry gums and dry shellac: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
(b) Turpentine (natural and synthetic)	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
206. Soap, soap powder and extracts	per 100 lbs. or ad valorem	0	4	9	0	0	7	per 100 lbs. or ad valorem	0	4	2	0	4	9
		25%			3%				20%			25%
					(whichever duty shall be the Free greater.)
207. Tallow, including vegetable tallow, and oleine	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
208. Tar and pitch, in bulk; provided they are of a standard approved by the Minister	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
209. Varnish, varnish stains, japans, lacquers, french polish, brunswick or berlin black, bitumen varnishes, terebine, liquid driers, liquid size, patent knotting, and gasket shellac	per imp. gallon	0	2	0	—			per imp. gallon	0	2	0	0	2	6
210. Waxes and greases:—
(a) Beeswax	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
(b) Other, n.e.e	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
Class VIII.—Drugs, Chemicals and Fertilisers.
211. Acetate of lead	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
212. Acetic and pyroligneous acids and extracts, essences of vinegar, of any strength, not exceeding six per cent of acetic acid:—
(a) In bottles or other vessels of a capacity of not more than one imperial quart	per imp. gallon	0	1	7	0	0	1	per imp. gallon	0	1	6	0	1	6
(b) In larger vessels	per imp. gallon	0	1	1	0	0	1	per imp. gallon	0	1	0	0	1	0
and in addition, in either case, for each one per cent. by weight of acetic acid in excess of six per cent.	per degree	0	0	5	0	0	1	per 1%	0	0	4	0	0	4
213. Acids:—
(a) Boric: in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Oxalic: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(c) Other, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
214. Alum, aluminium sulphate and alumino-ferric: in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
215. Ammonia (solution) and anhydrous ammonia, ammonium carbonate, ammonium chloride (salammoniac), ammonium nitrate, and ammonium perchlorate: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
216. Animal glands and tissues and their preparations, toxins and antitoxins, lymph, phylacogens, sera and vaccines: for prophylactic or therapeutic use, including adrenalin	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
217. Barium peroxide: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
218. Boiler compositions	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
219. Borax: in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
220. Bromine	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
221. Calcium:—
(a) carbonate, oxide, hydroxide, chloride, chlorate, bisulphite, cyanamide and sulphocyanide: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
(b) carbide of	per 100 lbs.	0	5	0	0	0	6	per 100 lbs.	0	5	0	0	5	0
222. Carbonic acid gas	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
223. Disinfectants:—
(a) in bulk, provided they are of a standard approved by the Minister	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem plus a ad valorem	5% suspended 15%			5% duty of 15%
(b) all other	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
224. Drugs and apothecaryware, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
225. Dyes, not being toilet preparations	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
226. Extracts for perfumery, n.e.e.	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
227. Fertilisers, in bulk: animal, mineral or vegetable, artificial or natural; and phosphate rock and maltassa	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
228. Glycerine:—
(a) Crude, in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) Distilled	ad valorem	25% and 3%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
229. Magnesium carbonate and magnesium sulphate: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
230. Manganese dioxide	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
231. Medicinal preparations, not elsewhere enumerated, when prepared by any secret or occult art or recommended to the public under any general name or title as specifics for any diseases or affections whatsoever affecting the human or animal bodies	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
232. Naphthalene: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
233. Nickel sulphate: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
234. Nitrates, except nitrate of ammonium, for manufacturing purposes or for fertilisers: in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
235. Pastes and powders containing not less than 30 per cent, of water-soluble phosphoric oxide, in the dry substance, for use in clarifying sugar juice: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
236. Peptone and agar-agar for making bacterial culture media	—	Free				—		—	Free			Free
237. Perchloride of iron: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
238. Perfumery and toilet preparations n.e.e., including powders, washes, pomatums, cosmetics, pastes, dyes, hair oils, but not including tooth powders, tooth pastes and tooth washes	ad valorem	40%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
239. Pills, imported in packages not for direct sale to the public	per lb.	1	0	0	—			per lb.	1	0	0	1	0	0
240. Platinum: chloride of	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
241. Potassium: carbonate, bicarbonate, silicate, bichromate, chlorate, sulphite, bisulphite, metabisulphite, permanganate, cyanide, sulphocyanide (thiocyanate), red and yellow prussiate of, and caustic potash: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
242. Radium compounds	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
243. Saltpetre: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
244. Sodium: (a) carbonate, including soda cystals (washing soda)	per 100 lbs.	0	2	0	—			per 100 lbs.	0	1	6	0	2	0
(b) bicarbonate, silicate, bichromate, chlorate, permanganate, sulphite, bisulphite, metabisulphite, sulphide, sulpho-cyanide (thio-cyanate), and caustic soda: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			3%
245. Sodium: cyanide of	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
								plus a suspended duty of
								per l00lbs	0	8	4	0	8	4
246. Substances for the prevention or destruction of agricultural pests: including sheep and cattle dips and dipping powders, and materials suitable only for dip; substances for the prevention or cure of diseases in plants or trees; sulphate of copper, arsenic, arsenite of soda and arsenate of lead	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			Free
								plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	10%			10%
247. Sulphur: in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
248. Sulphurous anhydride	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
249. Tooth powders, tooth pastes, and tooth washes containing not more than 3 per cent. proof spirit	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
Class IX.—Leather and Rubber, and Manufactures thereof.
250. Bands and belting of all kinds for driving machinery	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
251. Boots and shoes:—
(a) Of any material, and including slippers, sandals and goloshes and rubber soles, tips and heels, but not including infants’ shoes and bootees	ad valorem	30%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
(b) Infants’ shoes	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	12%			12%
252. Harness and saddlery:—
(a) New	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(b) Second-hand, for sale	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
								or
								per bridle	0	5	0	0	5	0
								per saddle	1	5	0	1	5	0
								per set of harness	2	10	0	2	10	0
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
253. Hose:—
(a) Rubber: air and water hose up to 3 inch diameter:—
plain	ad valorem	3%			3%			per lb.	0	0	1½	0	0	2¼
armoured	ad valorem	3%			3%			per lb.	0	0	1	0	0	l½
(b) Rubber: suction hose:—
plain	ad valorem	3%			3%			per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	3
armoured	ad valorem	3%			3%			per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	l½
(c) Rubber: Steam and other rubber hose, n.e.e.	ad valorem							per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	3
(d) Leather, canvas and other hose not containing rubber	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	10%			15%
254. Leather, in the piece:—
(a) Patent and enamelled	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Morocco, and sheepskin tanned with sumac and grained to imitate morocco
(c) Pigskin
(d) Valve hide
255 Leather, high grade, in the piece, viz.:—
(a) Black calf, being whole skins, when the measurement does not exceed 144 square feet per one dozen whole skins, and the measurement of no single skin exceeds 12½ square feet, and the free on board price is not less than Is. 3d. per square foot	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Coloured calf (other than black), being whole skins, when the measurement does not exceed 144 square feet per one dozen whole skins, and the measurement of no single skin exceeds 12½ square feet, and the free on board price is not less than Is. 6d. per square foot
(c) Black glacé kid, when the measurement does not exceed 84 square feet per one dozen whole skins, and the measurement of no single skin exceeds 7½ square feet, and the free on board price is not less than 1s. 3d. per square foot
(d) Coloured glacé kid (other than black), when the measurement does not exceed 84 square feet per one dozen whole skins, and the measurement of no single skin exceeds 7½ square feet, and the free on board price is not less than 1s. 6d. per square foot
(e) Suede, velour and velvet finish leathers (not including those made from splits, goat or sheep skins and not including leather known as chamois), when the measurement does not exceed 120 square feet per one dozen sides, and the measurement of no single side exceeds 10½ square feet, and the free on board price is not less than Is. 6d. per square foot
(f) Lining leather, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (a) to (e)	ad valorem	20%			3%			—	Free			Free
256. Leather, in the piece, not elsewhere enumerated:—
(a) bellies and shoulders, imported separately	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) other	ad valorem	20%			3%			per lb	0	0	6	0	0	6
								or
								ad valorem	20%			20%
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
257. Leather manufactures, namely: leggings, bags, trunks, portmanteaux, holdalls, belts, straps and gun cases, made wholly or chiefly of leather; not including fancy handbags	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
258. Rubber, unmanufactured: including latex, crude, waste, masticated and reclaimed rubber, and gutta percha	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
259. Rubber, manufactures of, n.e.e., and not being toys	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			20%
260. Rubber pneumatic tyres and tubes:—
(a) Tyres, including the weight of the immediate wrapper	per lb.	0	l	0	0	0	3	per lb.	0	0	10	0	l	0
(b) Tubes for motor vehicles other than motor cycles	per lb.	0	0	8	0	0	2	per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	7½
(c) Tubes for motor cycles and cycles	per lb.	0	l	0	0	0	3	per lb.	0	0	10	0	l	0
261. Rubber tyres, solid: complete or in lengths or in the piece	per lb.	0	0	3	0	0	1	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	3
Class X.—Wood, Cane and Wicker, and Manufactures thereof.
262. Beehives and wooden sections thereof, and wax foundations for	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
263. Boxes, wooden: empty or in shocks:—
(a) For packing fresh or dried fruits and dairy produce	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) For packing other classes of goods and for other purposes	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
264. Brushes and brooms, and wooden handles therefor:—
(a) Carpet brushes, brooms, whisks and mops	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(b) Other, not being platedware	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
								plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	10%			10%
265. Cane, bamboo, rattans and osiers:
(a) unmanufactured	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) manufactures of, not being furniture	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
266. Casks, wooden, n.e.e.: empty or in staves	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
267. Corkdust, sawdust, husks, or other waste substances, intended and suitable for use only as packing material	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
268. Corks:—
(a) Corks and wooden bungs	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
(b) Corkwood, unmanufactured	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
269. Furniture: wooden, wicker, cane and grass:—
(a) Seagrass and rattancore and wicker chairs	ad valorem	20%			3%			each	0	3	9	0	3	9
(b) Seagrass and rattancore and wicker settees	ad valorem	20%			3%			each	0	7	6	0	7	6
(c) Bentwood chairs	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
								plus a suspended duty of 1s each.
(d) other, and parts thereof	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
270. Handles, wooden, for picks, shovels and agricultural implements	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
271. Hubs, rims, spokes, felloes, shafts, tentbows and poles: cut or fashioned, not finished:
(a) for wagons and carts commonly used for the conveyance of goods	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) other	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	5%			5%
								plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	15%			15%
272 Joinery: wooden frameworks of houses including window frames, sills, and sashes, doors and lintels, staircases, casements, and mouldings	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
273. Plywood	per cubic foot or	0	4	0	0	0	6	per cubic foot or	0	4	0	0	4	0
	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
								(whichever duty shall be the greater).
274. Saddle trees	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
275. Shingles	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
276. Sleepers, railway or tramway, wooden	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
277. Staves, wooden, in the rough	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
278. Vats, wooden, for the manufacture of wines, and hogsheads of a capacity of 65 gallons or more, for the storage of wines or spirits	— ad valorem	Free 20%			— 3%			—	Free			Free
279. Wood:—
(a) Unmanufactured	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			3%
(b) Ceiling and flooring boards: planed, tongued, and grooved	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	3%			3%
								plus a suspended duty of
								ad valorem	17%			17%
280. Wood meal, wood pulp, and wood wool	—	Free			—			—	Free
Class XI.—Books, Paper and Stationery.
281. Atlases, charts, globes, and maps	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
282. Bags, paper:—
(a) Printed	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%.
(b) not printed	ad valorem	20%			3%			per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	1¼
283. Bank notes and other paper currency and postage stamps (used or unused)	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
284. Books, printed, and printed music, newspapers and periodicals, n.e.e., and which are not foreign unauthorised prints of any British or South African copyright work the importation of which is prohibited, or which are not advertising matter elsewhere enumerated	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
285. Cardboard boxes and cartons:—
(a) printed	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
(b) not printed	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(c) wax cartons (jars) for food products	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
286. Cardboard discs for milk bottles, plain or printed	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
287. Cardboard, linenboard, leatherboard, strawboard and millboard, but not including pulpboard for building purposes	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
288. Cards, playing	per pack and in addition	0	0	9				per pack and in addition	0	0	9	0	0	9
	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
289. Diagrams, drawings and plans	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
290. Engravings and photographs (not including enlargements or reproductions): not being labels or advertisements elsewhere enumerated	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
291. Inks and ink powders	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
292. Lithographs of religious subjects, including texts and mottoes, imported solely for the purpose of religious instruction	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
293. Newspapers or supplement editions or parts thereof, intended to be completed and published in the Union:—
(a) as religious publications	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) other	—	Free			—			ad valorem	40%			40%
								or per lb.	0	0	9	0	0	9
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
294. Paintings, etchings, picture books, not being advertisements elsewhere enumerated; and pictures for calendars, writing pads or box covers, not forming nor intended to form part of any imported printed, lithographed or embossed matter otherwise provided for	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
295. Paper :—
(a) Blotting, carbon, gummed, and wall	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
(b) Graphitized, lithographic transfer, plain tissue and greaseproof (plain or corrugated)	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(c) News print, in reels or in the flat	ad valorem	3%			3%			ad valorem	Free			5%
(d) Plain or composite, n.e.e. :—
(i) in the original mill wrappers, flat or folded, not less than 16 ins. by 15 ins	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(ii) in reels, including paper in reels used for the monotype typesetting machine	ad valorem							—	Free			Free
(e) Sanitary, sensitized and tracing	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(f) wrapping (including browns, casings, sealings, nature or ochre browns, sulphites, krafts, and bag papers): in original mill wrappers, or in sheets, or in rolls, when the weight of the paper, at a size of 29 ins. by 45 ins., or its equivalent, is not less than 30 lbs. per ream of 480 sheets; but not including grease proof, vegetable and imitation parchment, and cartridge papers and tinfoil and similar metallic papers	per lb.	0	0	0⅝	0	0	0⅛	per lb.	0	0	0⅝	0	0	0⅝
								plus a suspended duty of
								per lb.	0	0	0⅛	0	0	0⅛
296. Printed, ruled, lithographed and embossed matter (not being metal and not including embossed paper serviettes, d’oyleys and paper mats):—
(a) Enlargements or reproductions of photographs; picture postcards; Christmas, birthday, pictorial, New Year and other cards; calendars, calendar pads, calendar mounts and almanacs; pictures mounted or unmounted or for framing, not containing printed advertising matter; box-coverings and pictures intended to form part of imported printed, lithographed or embossed matter	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	35%			35%
(b) Directories, guide books, year books and handbooks, relating to South Africa; South African Christmas annuals, holiday and special numbers or editions of South African newspapers, magazines or periodicals or parts thereof; supplements to South African publications	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
								or per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(c) Account books, exercise books and copy books; stationery and forms in books, pads or loose; diaries n.e.e.; delivery, manifold, and index books; bank cheques, drafts, promissory notes, bills of exchange and similar forms; receipt forms: reminder slips; scrip, share certificates and company reports; membership certificates for lodges, unions and like institutions; letter headings and form letters; invoices and account forms	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
								or per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(d) Pocket books and pocket diaries, loose leaf and other, and refills therefor; lettercopying books; pin tickets	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(e) Envelopes (except what is technically known as “side die”)	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
(f) Labels, tickets n.e.e. and address tags, flat or in rolls	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
	or 3d. per lb.							or per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(g) (i) Catalogues and price lists of Union firms and firms holding stocks in South Africa, printed and posted abroad to individuals in South Africa	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
	or 3d. per lb.							or per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(ii) Catalogues and price lists of firms or persons having no established place of business in the Union and no permanent agent holding stocks in South Africa	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(h) All advertising matter, including advertising invoice forms and similar stationery usually issued gratis or at nominal prices	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
	or 3d. per lb.							or per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
(i) Stencil sheets for duplicating	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	10%			10%
(j) Other, including lithographs, n.e.e.	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	35%			35%
								or per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
								whichever duty shall be the greater.
297. Stationery, n.e.e. :—
(a) Loose-leaf covers and binders; letter or document files in book or folder form	ad valorem	25% 20%			3%			ad valorem	40%			40%
(b) other	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
Class XII.—Jewellery, Timepieces, Fancy Goods and Musical Instruments.
298. Band instruments and stands, the bona fide property of any military, naval, or police corps, and not the property of individuals	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
299. Beads	per lb.	0	0	6¼	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
		or 25%			3%			or	25%			25%
		ad valorem			ad valorem			ad valorem	whichever duty shall be the greater.
300. Clocks and watches; and cases and the set-up mechanism or movements therefor	ad valorem	Clocks, 20% Watches, 25%			3% 3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
301. Cups, medals and other trophies, not being for the purpose of advertisement—imported for presentation:—
(a) as prizes at public examinations, exhibitions or shows	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(b) as prizes for rifle shooting by military, naval or police forces	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(c) for bravery, good conduct, humanity, for excellence in art, industry, invention, manufactures, learning, science, or for honourable or meritorious public services	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
Provided that all such articles shall on importation or delivery free from the Customs bear engraved or otherwise indelibly marked on them the occasion or purpose for which they are presented.
302. Gold and silver plate, and gold and silver plated ware, not being church plate	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
303. Gramophones, phonographs, and records therefor	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	20%			25%
304. Jewellery, including imitation jewellery, and rolled gold, enamel or gilt-jewellery; precious stones and pearls and imitations thereof, cut or polished, and whether mounted or unmounted; completed portions or parts of any article of jewellery, imitation orotherwise; ornamental hat pins, ornamental hair pins and ornamental buckles; bangles, necklaces, girdles, muff chains, clasps, and similar articles of adornment	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
305. Musical instruments, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
306. Organs and blowers therefor, harmoniums, band instruments, and plate: imported by or for presentation to any religious body	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
307. Sporting and athletic goods, that is articles n.e.e. used for outdoor or indoor games; toys; and fishing appliances (not being for industrial purposes)	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
308. Tobacconists’ wares, including pipes, pouches, pipe covers, pipe stands, pipe cases, smokers’ cabinets, cigar and cigarette holders, match boxes, tobacco jars, cigar and cigarette cases, ash trays, cigar and cigarette lighters	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	30%			30%
Class XIII.—Miscellaneous.
309. Ambulance materials, imported by recognised associations, corps, or hospitals, lawfully established for instruction or drill in first aid to the wounded; including uniforms and badges for the St. John Ambulance Brigade or Association	ad valorem ad valorem	3% 20%			3% 3%			—	Free			Free
310. Ammunition and Explosives:—
(a) Blasting compounds, including all kinds of explosives suitable and intended for blasting, and not suitable for use in fire arms (except detonators); and collodion cotton not intended for manufacturing purposes	per lb.	0	0	2½	0	0	0½	per lb.	0	0	2	0	0	2
(b) Cartridges	ad valorem	15%			3%			ad valorem	15%			15%
And in addition on the gunpowder contained therein	per lb.	0	0	6	—			per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6
(c) Detonators, percussion caps and empty cartridge cases	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(d) Fireworks of all descriptions	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
(e) Fuse, blasting: (a) electric	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
(b) other	per lb.	0	0	1½	0	0	0¼	per lb.	0	0	1¼	0	0	1¼
(f) Gunpowder and other explosives suitable for use in firearms	per lb.	0	0	6 plus 15%	3%			per lb. and in addition	0	0	6	0	0	6
		ad valorem						ad valorem	15%			15%
(g) Shot, bullets and slugs	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
311. Appointments and uniforms for military or naval forces	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
312. Articles imported or taken out of bond for the use of the Governor-General	—	Rebated			—			—	Free			Free
313. Assay mabor and assayer’s bone ash	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
314. Astronomical instruments and equipment therefor, imported by institutions or societies engaged in astronomical work	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
315. Bioscopes, cinematographs and magic-lanterns: and slides for the same, but not including films	ad valorem	25%			3%			ad valorem	25%			25%
316. Church decorations, altars, bells, fonts, lecterns, pulpits and vestments: imported by or for presentation to any religious body	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
317. Consular uniforms and appointments; and articles (not being private wearing apparel, food or drink or tobacco in any form) for the official or private use of Consuls or Trade Commissioners, who are not engaged in or connected with any other business, profession or occupation in the Union	(under rebate)	Free			—				Free			Free
318. Felt, rubberoid and similar substances: for building purposes	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
319. Films, cinematograph :—
(a) Blank films, known as raw films or stock	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Of a scientific or educational nature, for exhibition solely to scientific or technical societies or in educational institutions, or certified by the Secretary for Public Health to be for use in the interests of public health		per 100ft.			—			—	Free			Free
		0	5	0
		or 20% ad valorem
(c) Other	—	per 100ft.			3%			per 100 feet or	0	2	6	0	2	6
		0	5	0
		or 20% ad valorem						ad valorem	30%			30%
								(whichever duty shall be the greater.)
320. Ice	—	Free			—				Free			Free
321. Life belts and buoys, and other life-saving (including mine-rescue) apparatus	—	Free			—				Free			Free
322. Matches:—
(a) Wooden, including match splints: in boxes or packages of not more than 100 matches, per gross of boxes or packages	—	0	2	6	—				0	1	9	0	2	6
In boxes containing more than 100, but not more than 200 matches, per gross of boxes or packages	—	0	5	0	—				0	3	6	0	5	0
And for every 100 additional matches, in boxes or packages, per gross of 100 matches	—	0	2	6	—				0	1	9	0	2	6
(b) Fusees, vestas or wax matches, or other patent lights used as such: In boxes or packages containing not more than 50, per gross of boxes or packages	—	0	2	6	—				0	2	6	0	2	6
In boxes or packages of more than 50, but not more than 100, per gross of boxes or packages	—	0	5	0	—				0	2	6	0	2	6
And for every 50 additional in boxes or packages, per gross of 50 matches	—	0	2	6	—				0	2	6	0	2	6
323. Models, not being toys and not being for advertising purposes	—	Free			—				Free			Free
324. Photographic apparatus and material, n.e.e. and not including process cameras imported by lithographers	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
325. Public stores, imported or taken out of bond by, and bona fide for the sole and exclusive use of, the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and of any Government belonging to the Union; provided that a certificate be delivered to the Customs authorities given under the hand of an officer approved by the Commissioner of Customs, setting forth that any duty levied on such public stores would be borne directly by the Government; and provided further that no portion of such stores used or unused shall be sold of otherwise disposed of so as to come into the possession of or into consumption by any person not legally entitled to import the same free of duty, without the consent of the Commissioner of Customs and the payment of the duties to him by the officer so selling or disposing of such public stores at the rate leviable at the date of sale	—	Free			—				Free			Free
326. School and hospital furniture and requisites, including materials and requisites required for the construction and equipment of buildings erected by a university, college, school or public hospital, being articles certified by any official appointed for that purpose in the Union; but not including athletic or sporting goods; provided the certificate is endorsed by the Board of Trade and Industries to the effect that the goods are not ordinarily made in the Union	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
327. Scientific apparatus and instruments for scientific observation or record or for the control of manufacturing operations	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
328. Specimens illustrative of natural history and exhibits and antiquities: for public museums or other institutions to which the public have free access, or for scientific purposes	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
329. Surgical and dental instruments and appliances, and instruments and appliances used by registered medical practitioners or by veterinary surgeons in the diagnosis or treatment of diseases or affections of the human or animal body	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
Vessels:— 330. Boats, launches and yachts, n.e.e.	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
331. Hulks	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
332. Life boats	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
333. Tugs, ship’s tenders, dredgers and lighters: provided that when condemned or landed to be broken up duty shall be paid at the Customs on the hull and all fittings, according to the tariff that may be in force	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
334. Yachts, the property of tourists visiting South Africa; under such conditions as the Minister may prescribe	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
Class XIV.—General.
335. All goods, wares and merchandise, not included under any other heading in the tariff, and not provided for in Class XV	ad valorem	20%			3%			ad valorem	20%			20%
Class XV.—Materials for Industrial Purposes.
[The articles and substances enumerated in this class will, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Classes I, to XIV., be admitted duty free on importation, under such conditions and regulations as the Minister may prescribe, if intended for use only in the manufacturing industry mentioned in each instance.]
336. Bacon and meat industries: Parchment containers for lard; hog casings (sausage skins)	ad valorem	20%			3%			—	Free			Free
337. Bag making industry:—
(1) Cotton piece goods for the manufacture of tobacco and other bags as containers for South African produce and manufactures	ad valorem	15%			12%			—	Free			Free
(2) Wrapping paper for use in the manufacture of paper bags	per lb. or	0	0	0⅝	Whole duty less			—	Free			Free
	ad valorem	3%			3%
338. Boot and Shoe making industry: Boot and shoe makers’ grindery, including tips, caps, and plates; canvas, duck and combined duck, poplins, fabric linings, loopings, bindings, trimmings and backing cloth; cotton, linen and silk threads; wooden heels, eyelets and hooks, buttons, and buckles and ornaments n.e.e.; fibreboard, fibrok, socking paper, moulded stiffeners, bottom fillings and solution is fibre fillers, lasts, tools, brushes, abrasives, and crayons; boot blacking and boot polishes and waxes not being for re-sale	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
339. Broom and Brush making Industry: Fibre and grass cleaned or dyed but not further prepared or manufactured	ad valorem	Dyed 20%			3%			—	Free			Free
340. Canvas goods manufacturing industry : Canvas in the piece weighing less than 8 ozs. per yard of 28½ in. in width, tent rings, brass eyelets, hooks and eyes, webbing and thread	ad valorem	20%			17%			—	Free			Free
341. Cattle foods : Concentrates for cattle food manufactured in the Union	ad valorem	20%			3%				Free			Free
342. Confectionery and biscuit manufacturing industries : Confectioners’ requisites, imported in bulk, namely, golden syrup, cocoa mass paste or slab, desiccated unsweetened coconut, block chocolate, unsweetened, gelatine (animal or vegetable), raw gums, deodorized or hydrogenated refined vegetable fats, and cocoa butter	—	Various			—			—	Free			Free
343. Dips, disinfectant and insecticide manufacturing industry : Ferrous and zinc sulphates; linseed, castor and whale oil, fatty acids; turpentine, cresylic acid, green oil, vaporizing oil, verpine, iodine and potassium iodide; in bulk, for the manufacture of dips, dipping powders and other substances for the destruction of agricultural pests; methyl salicyl for fly spray; carbolic and naphthalic acid, nitro benzol, crude pine oil and crude terebine oil	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
344. Electric batteries manufacturing industry : Terminals, plugs and other metal parts, insulators, glass tubes, dolls, composition pitch, ceresin wax and exciter salts	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
345. Explosives manufacturing industry : Magnesium sulphate and magnesium carbonate in bulk; paraffin wax, stearine wax and stearine grease, collodion cotton and amatol; distilled glycerine in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	—			—
	—	Free			—			—	—			—
	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
346. Furniture making industry: Hinges, locks and keys, escutcheons, handles, castors, webbing, studs and binding, gimps, cords, and similar edgings, metal parts of blind rollers, twisted seagrass, and haircloth	ad valorem	3%			3%				Free			Free
347. Hat and cap manufacturing industry : Raw felt, straw plaits, inside bands, linings of any material cut to shape, black padding and cap peaks cut to shape	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
348. Leather work, including the manu facture of bags, trunks, leggings, belts, straps, harness, saddlery: Handtools for bridle-makers, saddlers, harness-makers and bagmakers, solution, fibreboard, hempite and similar compositions, metal and other frames, wooden hoops, locks, clips, studs, handles, swivels, caps, corners, hat box cones, eyelets and hooks, springs, buckles, rings and other metal fittings, webs and webbing, seat linen, painted canvas, painted hessian, willesden green cloth and stiffening paper, saddle serge, saddle felt, linen thread, linings for suit cases, bags, trunks and other bag-ware, saddle nails, bridle rosettes of metal	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
349. Metalization processes and micanite manufacture:—
(a) Wire of all kinds, and metals in powder form for metalization processes	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Insulating varnish for micanite manufacture	per gall.	0	2	0	—			—	Free			Free
350. Mining industry :—
(1) Eucalyptus, pine and other oils for use in connection with the extraction of gold and other minerals by the flotation process	ad valorem	25%			25%			—	Free			Free
(2) Sodium sulphide for use in the concentration of ore by the flotation process	ad valorem	20%			3%			—	Free			Free
(3) Corduroy for use as battery cloth	ad valorem	15%			12%			—	Free			Free
351. Motor fuel manufacturing industry : Substances to be used as denaturants; motor spirit for mixing with locally produced alcohol for the purpose of producing power alcohol	ad valorem	20%			3%			—	Free			Free
	per gall.	0	0	2	0	0	2	—	Free			Free
352. Oil expressing industry : Oil seeds and nuts, edible and nonedible, in bulk	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
353. Paints, varnish, polish and putty manufacturing industries : Materials, in bulk, for the manufacture of paints, varnish, and polish and putty for re-sale, namely : Leads, white and red, dry or ground in oil, and lithopone, linseed oil, boiled or raw, linsidol and similar substitutes for linseed oil, turpentine (natural or synthetic), waxes for polish making and sulphate of iron for colouring distempers	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
	ad valorem	20%			17%
	ad valorem	20%			3%
354. Paper making industry: Resin size: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
355. Pipe (tobacco) making industry; Stems (other than wooden), bone screws, clay and asbestos pipe cups, disc rasps and files, felt bobs and mops for polishing, erinoid rods, meerschaum blocks, mouth pieces of vulcanite, amber, amberoid, erinoid, celluloid, bakelite, and horn, clay linings and cups, shellac, block vulcanite, hinge tops	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
356. Printing, lithographing, bookbinding and cardboard boxmaking industries:—
(1) Inks: printing, lithographic and ruling; ruling ink powder, roller composition stamping colours and printers’ bronze powder: litho graphic offset powder and ink drier; gold, silver, bronze and aluminium leaf	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(2) Process block makers’ requisites, namely: Nitrate of silver, collodion, iodizer, fish glue, dragons blood, glacial acetic acid, biphosphate of ammonia, glass screens, plate and photographic paper. Varnish including litho varnish, glass marbles, pumice blocks, snakestone blocks, stereo blotting paper and graining grit	—	Various			—			—	Free			Free
(3) Bookbinders’ cloth, canvas in white and colours, American cloth, webbing, parchment, leather, imitation leather, corduroy, skins, vellum, binders’ paper, marble paper, thread, tape and pulpboard	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(4) Wall paper or other fancy paper in rolls, for boxmaking; and metal eyelets, parts and edging, and corrugated lined board	ad valorem	20%			30%			—	Free			Free
	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(5) Gum for envelopes	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(6) Sulphite papers, for printing purposes only	per lb.	0	0	0⅝	0	0	0⅛	—	Free			Free
(7) Cloth for the manufacture of heliographic paper	ad valorem	15%			3%			—	Free			Free
357. Rope, twine and cordage manufacturing industry: Batching oil, and ingredients for the same; and lubricants used in the manufacture of steel wire ropes, in bulk..	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
358. Rubber manufacturing industry: For the manufacture of rubber and rubber goods:—
(a) Pigments, filling agents and vulcanising accelerators, viz., zinc oxide (zinc white), zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, antimony sulphide (yellow and red), alumina, magnesium carbonate, calcined magnesia, lithopone (mixture of zinc sulphide and barium sulphate or of zinc white and barium sulphate), vegetable black, carbon black, Prussian blue, white and red lead, ebonite powder, and emarex (natural pitch); in bulk	ad valorem	20% or 3%			20% or 3%			—	Free			Free
(b) Rubber substitutes, viz,, vulcanised vegetable oils; in bulk	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(c) Rubber compounding oils, viz., aniline oil, rosin oil, and vaseline; in bulk..	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(d) Rubber solvents, viz., benzene (benzol), coal tar naphtha, westrosol, westron, carbon disulphide; in bulk	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(e) Vulcanising agents, viz., sulphur chloride, in jars of not less than one imperial gallon	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free
(f) Canvas in the piece and mercury sheeting	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(g) Yams, ammonia and linseed oil (boiled)..	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
359. Shirt, collar and pyjama suit manufacturing industry: Piece goods of cotton or wool or mixtures thereof, buttons and pyjama girdles: provided they are imported direct by a manufacturer, who must be licensed under the Factory Act and employ not less than ten operatives	ad valorem	3% or 15%			3% 3%			—	Free			Free
360. Soap, candle and grease making industry: Soya bean oil, citronella oil, mirbane oil, castor oil, raw linseed oil and crude oil; paraffin wax, stearine wax and stearine grease	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	—			—
	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
361. Steelware manufacturing industry: Eyelets, rims and rings for pressed steelware; rough steel tubing for petrol and other fillers	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
362. Textile industry:—
(1) Yarns for use in the manufacture of suitings, coatings and other dress material, and of blankets and sheetings, and for machine knitted goods	ad valorem	20%			17%			—	Free			Free
(2) Oils for lubricating wool in the process of spinning and weaving by manufacturers of woven goods	ad valorem	20%			17%			—	Free			Free
(3) Acetic and formic acid	ad valorem	20%			3%			—	Free			Free
(4) Silk woven labels and tabs	ad valorem	20%			3%			—	Free			Free
363. Tanning industry: Substances for preparing or bating hides and skins, and for tanning and finishing leather: including formic acid, acetic acid, hyposulphite of soda, and tanners’ white soap	—	Free			—			—	—			—
	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	—			—
	ad valorem	25%			3%			—	Free			Free
364. Tin printing industry: Stoving varnishes and lacquers, in bulk	per gall.	0	2	0	0	2	0	—	Free			Free
365. Waterproof clothing manufactures: Rubber-proofed material; in the piece, made of cotton, hair, silk or wool, or mixtures thereof, and coal tar naphtha	ad valorem	20%			5%			—	—			—
	per gall.	0	0	3	Nil			—	Free			Free
366. Whaling industry:—
(1) Gunpowder and time fuses	per lb.	0	0	6	0	0	6	—	Free			Free
(1) Gunpowder and time fuses	(fuses)	+15% 20%			+12% 17%
(2) Harpoons, whaling guns and parts thereof, manilla and hemp whale lines over 3½ inches in circumference	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(3) Drums for the export of whale oil	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
367. Windmill manufacturing industry: Brass tubes (rough drawn)	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
368. Wine, brandy and spirit industry:—
(1) Matured second-hand wine and brandy casks of a capacity of not more than 65 liquid gallons, for maturing spirits distilled under section six of Act 5 of 1924	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(2) Matured wine and brandy casks for use as containers of South African wine for export	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(3) Steel drums for use as containers of South African spirits for export..	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
369. Wire for the manufacture of wire netting	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
370. Woolwashing; Soap and like substances	ad valorem	25%			25%			—	Free			Free
371. Materials for general industrial purposes:—
(1) Dyes, colour preparations, spirituous or non-spirituous, and glazes: used in the manufacture or preparation of articles for sale..	—							—	Free			Free
(2) Oils, in bulk: palm, palm kernel, coconut, cotton seed, mafurra, resin, whale and sea elephant..	—	Free			—			—	Free			Free
(3) Oxides in bulk, namely: cobalt, copper, iron, tin, and zinc; and pigments (dry)	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free
(4) Solvent naphtha, sealtite and similar fluxes for use by manufacturers in the sealing of containers	ad valorem	20%			20%			—	Free			Free
(5) Molasses, in bulk	per 100 lbs.	0	4	6	nil			—	Free			Free
(6) Resin, including artificial resin, dry gums, dry shellac: in bulk	ad valorem	3%			3%			—	Free			Free

GENERAL NOTE

The headings of the respective Classes in this Schedule are used only for convenience of classification, and shall not in any way affect the interpretation of the Tariff.

“N.e.e.” means “not elsewhere enumerated.”

“Proof” shall mean the strength of proof as ascertained by Sikes’s hydrometer.

“Proof spirits” shall mean spirits which, at a temperature of 51 degrees Fahrenheit, weigh twelve thirteenths part of an equal measure of distilled water.

The term “in bulk” when it appears in the Tariff, means—

(а) goods loose without packing, or loose in barrels, casks or any other single outside package or
(b) that the net contents of any immediate container of goods weigh not less than ten pounds or measure not less than one imperial gallon.

“Piece goods” shall not include material which is defined by selvedge or by pattern for cutting up into separate articles.

24 reputed half-pints, 12 reputed pints, 6 reputed quarts, and 4 reputed imperial quarts to be deemed to be not less than 1 gallon.

Tins, jars or other receptacles of reputed weight to be deemed to be not less than such weight.

Reputed 12 oz., 14 oz., and 16 oz. packets of candles to be deemed to be of those weights respectively.

Cement in packages of not less than 350 lbs., and not more than 400 lbs., to be deemed 400 lbs.

Packages of flour or wheaten meal containing not less than 90 lbs., and not more than 100 lbs., to be deemed to be 100 lbs., and packages containing more than 180 lbs., and not more than 200 lbs., to be deemed to be 200 lbs.

Oils, and motor spirits, in ordinary reputed two 5 American gallon or ten 1 American gallon tins to be deemed to be not less than 8⅓ imperial gallons, and two 4 reputed gallon tins to be deemed to be not less than 8 imperial gallons.

Goods mixed or made up of more than one article liable to duty under any of the Classes of this Schedule and not chemically forming another distinct substance, are chargeable with the full duty payable on the article charged with the highest rate of duty and as if such article formed the whole composition.

Mr. JAGGER:

I move—

That the first part of the motion stand over until the Tariff of Customs Duties has been considered, and that the classes of the tariff be taken seriatim.

Agreed to.

On Class I,

†Mr. JAGGER:

I would call attention to No. 6, where the duty was 3d., with the rebate; now it is 4d: I presume in all cases the maximum tariff will be applied. A large increase of duty has taken place also in cheese. It was 1¼d. before, and now it has been increased to 4d., or 30 per cent., whichever is the higher. There is also an increase on confections and cocoa. The latter has been increased from 1½d. to 2d., and from 2d. to 2½d. I notice that in such things as Quaker oats and oatmeal there is an increase from 2s. 9d. to 3s., or 2s. 6d. and 3s., if you take off the rebate. There is an increase in bacon and ham from 1¼d. (or 1d. with the rebate off), to not less than 3d.; an increase of 2d. a pound. There is an increase in milk from 10s. 4d. (8s. 4d. with rebate off), to 10s. 5d., also an increase in nuts, and in salt of 20 per cent. All these are for the most part necessaries of life, and are bound to increase the cost of living. Take butterine, or butter substitutes, which have been put up by ¾d. lb. That is going to fall on the poorer part of the population. Take cheese, it is put up 3d. lb., if you take off the rebate, or we will say 3¾d. So far as I am aware, this is an industry which is flourishing. I notice that in the year ending 30th June, 1924, there was an export of cheese amounting to no less than 13,745 lbs. In that case it would appear that this industry can already compete in the world’s market. Then there has been an increase in fish paste. I have made enquiries and find this article is used largely by the poorest of the population in the towns. Then, in regard to milk, this milk duty was put on about 12 months ago. There was one factory at that time in Natal. There has been no increase in the number of factories. It is a heavy duty. The importation of milk last year was no less than £307,000. There is only one factory in this country of this nature. I should imagine that these new duties will handicap in some degree butter and cheese making. Under the circumstances the Government is not justified in imposing these new duties. Mr. P. J. du Toit, the permanent head of the agricultural department, in the course of an address at Malmesbury on June 26, said—

Here the protective duty will have the effect of lulling the producers to sleep. The MINISTER OF POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS:

Is that what it has done in America?

†Mr. JAGGER:

We are not speaking of America. If we followed America’s example and produced more this would be a very different country. Besides, the United States has a home population of 110 millions to serve. Mr. du Toit went on to say—

Do we produce more as the result of the increased duty on wheat? It is just the reverse. Our lands are getting poorer, and our costs are rising. Soon there will be another request for an additional duty. The only real remedy is to put our heads together and to bring down the cost of production. South Africa is not the only country with a poor soil.

So far as I can see the new duties are not going to do any good, but will increase the cost of living. I move—

In item (6), in the last column, to omit “4d.” and to substitute “3¼d.”; in item (8), in the last column, to omit “4d.” and to substitute “1¼d.”; in item (31), in the last column, to omit “3d.” and to substitute “1¼d.”; and in item (32), in the last column, to omit “10s. 5d.” and to substitute “4s. 2d”. †*Mr. STEYTLER:

I understand that the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) has proposed to reduce the customs duty on cheese and butter. I want to point out to the Minister that 800,000 lbs. of butter was recently imported. As the representative of a milk producing district I am flooded with letters from the farmers urging that a stop should be put to this importation. I think that their demand is a very fair one. The manufacture of cheese and butter is an industry which is natural to this country, and if proper protection be given we shall be able to supply the whole country. I think that it is unfair to lessen this protection. I would rather that the Minister made it greater because then we should be able to provide for all local requirements.

†Mr. GILSON:

While I am rather loth to disagree with the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), I am afraid I must oppose his amendment. I quite agree with him that in theory it is in the best interests of the farmers that there should be free trade all round, but this House has adopted—for good or for evil—the principle of all-round protection. The Wage Bill is going to raise the cost of production. Surely if the costs of production are going to be increased the farmers should be given a certain amount of protection in order that they should not have to compete with the products of overseas countries which can produce cheaper than we can. I hope the Minister will stand firm in regard to these duties, for they only give the farmer that protection which is essential for the establishment of industries here. Just as the town industries want protection, so do the farming industries.

†Mr. KENTRIDGE:

I want to draw attention to an item in the light of certain principles which have been referred to in the course of the debate and which are generally accepted in the House and the country. I refer to Item 14, Confectionery. It is not possible that we shall be able to manufacture this in the country for a considerable period. We are agreed that wherever it is possible by means of a tariff to foster the establishment of industries in South Africa it is our duty to take every available step to see that the industry is established. But in establishing such industry then I think the Minister should take two aspects seriously into consideration, firstly, that we want to try and develop such an industry and as far as possible keep the cost of living down, and in that case we should foster the industry by means of a bounty and not a tariff, and secondly, that where the article is not being manufactured nor likely to be manufactured for some time to come in South Africa, there is no justification why the preference which existed in favour of the article coming from Great Britain should be done away with. With regard to high-class confectionery, which is not being manufactured in South Africa, and will not be for a considerable time, I fail to see what advantage there can be to this country to do away with the rebate in favour of England, and thus drive the trade to Germany where everything is done by coolie standards of labour and the cheapest possible labour. In that way we are doing something to the detriment of England and to the injury of South Africa. The more you encourage sweated manufactured articles to come into this country the more you keep down the rate of wages in this country. There are many other articles in the tariff to which this can apply, and I ask the Minister to take these items into consideration, because by adhering to his present arrangement he is not helping South Africa, but he is injuring the industrialists in England and diverting industry to countries where they have sweated labour

†Mr. BARLOW:

I am glad the hon. member has struck this note, because I notice cases where the Government have taken away the preference on goods which cannot, are not and will not be manufactured in South Africa, and has put England into competition with countries like Switzerland and Germany, where they pay a low rate of wages. As far as labour is concerned, we don’t want to help an industry to send their goods to this country when the stuff is produced at a much lower rate of wages than exist in our country. English wages are on a high rate, and we prefer the trade to go to England. For one reason, England takes our goods, and I find, from the figures, that at the present moment we are getting from Switzerland £14,000 a year, and from the United Kingdom £30,000. This item in the tariff is one of the points England is asking us to help them on, but our Government says—

No, we put you on the same level as we do the Swiss.

That is no good to England, nor to us. The people in Europe, especially Germany, are working 10 to 11 hours a day at a low rate of wages. I notice the ad valorem duties are the rule in the tariff. They are levied on the home consumption value of the goods. What is the home consumption value of the goods? As the Bill is not before the House, no one really knows, and if we don’t know, how can we discuss it? It is quite impossible to argue unless the Minister tells us what the home consumption value of the goods really is. An important question has arisen in regard to sugar. It is claimed there is dumping of American sugar in South Africa. This claim rests on the comparative price with the home consumption value. I would put a question to the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls) as to what he means by dumping of sugar. I have written down the question. It is claimed that there is dumping, because the price of the goods on which the duty is not paid, that is the export price, is less by the amount of the duty than the price of the goods on which the duty is paid though the amount received by the manufacturer is the same in both cases. If that is going to be claimed about sugar, you might claim it about whisky and the new artificial silk stockings, the raw material for which comes from Belgium.

†The CHAIRMAN:

What item is the hon. member on?

†Mr. BARLOW:

I am on chocolates. I am arguing the point on sugar used in chocolates. And that is why I am asking the Minister what he is doing about the dumping of sugar. If we don’t bring it up now we shall never get a chance, so I ask the Minister to answer that question. I would ask the Minister whether he is prepared to put into this tariff a stipulation that we shall never go higher than 40 per cent., so that we may know where we stand. The more you go into it the more pitfalls there are, and one really needs to be an absolute expert to deal with this tariff; that is, if you do not get the information I am asking for.

†Maj. RICHARDS:

I hope that the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) will not press his amendment to a division. In the first place, the policy of protection was fought out at the last election and accepted by the country and it is only right that it should be given a fair trial. In the second place, if he were to carry his amendment, which I think there is no possibility of his doing, it would mean the shutting down at once of a number of factories which are only just getting on their legs, particularly the bacon factories, and this as I will show will hit the hon. member himself very hard. He is the well-known breeder of a very high type of pigs, and a great impetus in pig breeding has taken place recently in connection with the increased demands of the bacon industry. He, I know, has been doing quite a big trade in pigs at a very profitable price. I happen to be one of the purchasers of those very fine pigs, but if the hon. member now gets his way and the bacon factories have consequently to close down, it will look very much as if he had been getting our money by irregular means, because we shall have bought these pigs for an industry which owing to his action will no longer exist. I think that the hon. member, having registered this protest, should be satisfied with that; but I do agree that the bacon factories will have to pay serious regard to the price demanded of the consumer, and not risk the loss of this enhanced protection, as has been hinted by the Minister for Finance, by surcharging.

Mr. MOFFAT:

I really cannot understand how farmers can be protectionists, because, after all, the farmer does not look merely to a local market as his industry develops. He looks to an export trade. If there is any industry in this country which ought to be able to start on its own basis without any protection it is the dairy industry. We are crying out in this country for the employment of the young men, and we have plenty of land available and suitable for dairying, and yet here we want to protect an industry which ought to be able to start on a fair basis of its own. If we start with a protective duty on dairy products, it simply means that we are starting on a wrong basis. I do feel that, in regard to dairying in particular, we ought to start fair and square on the right basis of the market values of the world, and really when I think of what has already been done in the dairying industry in this country I think we ought to be encouraged to go on and compete in the open markets of the world with our products. The hon. member for Griqualand (Mr. Gilson) knows very well that this particular area has competed in the dairy shows in England with great success. I happened to be in England some years ago, when Griqualand East cheese took the first prize against all the Dominions for the best class of cheese. If we can do that in Europe in regard to cheese, we can do it also in regard to butter and other dairy products. I think that if we start on a protectionist policy in this country in regard to farm products we shall be handicapping ourselves in the development of our industries. If we, as farmers, look for a protectionist policy, how can we oppose the protection of other industries in this country? Let us be free traders and show that we are prepared to compete in the open markets of the world with our products. As free traders—

†The CHAIRMAN:

The hon. member may discuss the particular item, but he cannot go into a general discussion as to whether there should be free trade or protection in this country.

Mr. MOFFAT:

I am dealing with the fact that we are adopting a protectionist policy for these particular articles. I think it would be a mistake for us, as farmers, to do that, because I feel that we should handicap our industry to this extent, that the cost of production would be increased all round. To be consistent we ought to oppose any system of protection for our particular industry.

Mr. CHRISTIE:

I am glad that in the early stages of this suggested tariff, the committee is approaching the question in a very serious manner. The question of protection is one of such importance that I propose to direct the attention of the committee to other items that are coming on later. I am not so much concerned about this item as I am about the many items that will come on at a later stage. With regard to this duty of 35 per cent. ad valorem on high-class confectionery, it does not take very much understanding to realize that as far as the higher class confectionery, particularly chocolates, is concerned, the result is going to be simply to shut out the English. American and Canadian manufacturers of these high-class goods, and we shall see that this trade will get more into the hands of Germany. With this tariff of 35 per cent. ad valorem, you will shut out every other industry where the men and women are working under fair conditions and at a fair day’s wage, and you will find that your higher class chocolates must come from Germany. They are making high-class chocolates at Woodstock, but it is not going to be able to compete against some of the imported chocolates. It is almost going to force some of the people who make chocolates in this country to put on a false trade description. We must give credit to the Government for an endeavour to try and develop South African industries; but I am afraid that instead of doing that it is going to increase the cost of many of these things, and is going to drive the trade of this country away from legitimate white channels into channels where people are working under low economic conditions. This is one of the least important of the items, but it is well that we should approach the smaller points before we come to the bigger ones. I hope the Minister will deal with this in an elastic way in so far as we must take advantage where it is possible. The most important point of all is that we must apply a tariff for the benefit of industries in the country or for industries that are developing, where the country has a nucleus of that development or where we see a possibility of an immediate development. The question of sugar has been dealt with by the hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) (Mr. Barlow), but I want to point out that when you come to the higher grades of confectionery, that when it says 3½d. per lb. or 35 per cent. ad valorem there is no question that it is going to be the 35 per cent. I hone the Minister will see that some elasticity will be given.

†Mr. ROBINSON:

During the present session we have noted some very remarkable developments as the result of the Pact, but nothing strikes me as being more extraordinary than that it is left to us to look after the working man so far as his butter and bacon are concerned, whilst our Socialistic friends are busying themselves with the importation of confectionery. I suppose when we come to motor cars there will be a similar protest. Candidly, I think nothing has been more humiliating than this spectacle this afternoon. Here we have these gentlemen on the cross benches who for years past have advocated cheapening the cost of living for working people; and this afternoon when the question is raised in concrete form by the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) not one voice from those benches is raised, and they all show the utmost concern over imported confectionery. It is an eye-opener, and an indication of what this combination of parties is leading to. We are finding that the poorer people have to be defended by so-called Tories. To come down to the hon. member for Cape Town (Central’s) proposal, I would like to ask tile Minister what is the necessity for the increase of these duties on agricultural exports. We are taking the item cheese. I know the hon. member has indicated that there is an export trade in cheese in South Africa already, and I know so far as Johannesburg is concerned of the case of one farmer up there who can find a ready market for every cheese he can turn out. I know as a matter of fact that he has many orders from Johannesburg and other places for his cheeses which he cannot supply. Although the Eastern Transvaal is not so celebrated for these cheeses as the division from which the hon. member for Griqualand (Mr. Gilson) comes, I do not know that they have any difficulty in selling their cheese, even in competition with imported cheese. Whilst I personally am a strong protectionist, I certainly would like to know what is the necessity for raising the price of these commodities upon which the poorer classes of the community so much depend. Certainly I would like to appeal to the gentlemen on the cross benches to forget their chocolates for five minutes and come down to these matters, matters which they have always contended for. It is the same old cry; it was bread once; they dropped the bread. Here is a chance of cheapening cheese, butter and bacon, and not one word from the hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) and his party; they are all concerned about the chocolates.

†Mr. PEARCE:

I am very surprised at the hon. member. It is a matter we must deal with under the item under discussion, that is, dairy products and confectionery, etc. It is the same principle. I would like to draw the hon. member’s attention to one or two facts. If we start a free trade policy we know full well that in this country we are living on a higher standard than what is unfortunately the case in Central Europe. The report of the German Economic Commission and South African reports lay down that whereas in South Africa it would take eight hours for a carpenter to earn enough to buy a pair of boots, on the other hand it would take a carpenter in Germany 62 hours to earn enough to do so. In other words, he would produce the commodity so much cheaper by having to work longer hours for a smaller equivalent wage, therefore the ultimate cost of production would be so low that if it was imported to this country it would undersell the products of this country. Take a suit of clothes. It takes a working man approximately a week to earn enough money to purchase a suit of clothes. In Germany he would have to work 13½ weeks, showing very clearly that if we allow free import of commodities it would be cheaper in cash for a working man to purchase, but he would have no money to purchase the articles the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) imported from countries where the conditions of the workers were worse than in South Africa, therefore we must stand for the principle of a person being able to live, not by exploiting other people, whereby the men in this country will be unable to purchase any commodities. We find the equivalent values in all other countries are at the mercy of gentlemen of the stamp of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), who have their agents in every country and who purchase the products of every country, if we carry out the free trade policy which he has advocated, not only will you have foreign confectionery coming into this country, and foreign cheese and eggs, but every commodity which is necessary for the people of this country. I would like the Minister not only to increase the duty on these commodities, but to go further, and be more drastic in relation to articles partly manufactured on the continent and finished and packed in Britain and exported to this country. Many of the commodities which reach these shores as British are only partly British. We find that while it would cost 73s. to produce a particular commodity in this country, the same article would cost 56s. 9d. in Britain and 19s. in Germany. We also know, in connection with confectionery, that beet is cultivated very greatly in Germany, and they are able to produce sugar there even cheaper than we can in this country, so that, by our protectionist policy, we are not only benefitting the people of this country, but incidentally benefitting the people in central Europe, by stipulating that they cannot export to this country until they develop themselves to a, higher standard from an economic point of view.

†Mr. HAY:

I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to item No. 17, “eggs.” This has nothing to do with elections. There you find liquid or dried eggs, duty 3d. a pound. These liquid eggs come from China, and the imports for the last year amounted to £3,600, nearly all from China. I should like to see a duty of 3s. a pound put on liquid eggs. Anyone who has any knowledge of liquid eggs from China, will desire to see their import as foodstuffs, prohibited. I suppose there is no country in the world that has developed the art of adulteration to the extent China has, and I am sorry for the people who eat cakes and other things made with these liquid eggs. I hope the Minister will enquire into this matter, and put on a prohibitive duty to prevent such eggs ever coming in. Then in regard to item 22, fruits. I am surprised that the maximum tariff proposed in regard to bottled, tinned or preserved fruits is only 2¼d.

I think if these imported preserved fruits are going to be consumed in this country it should only be possible io place them on the table like champagne or other out of the way luxuries whose presence are an indication of extreme wealth. If this tariff is to operate as a protective tariff, as it should, that small tariff ought to be quadrupled. I do not think we should in any way encourage preserved fruit being brought in from outside. We ought to make the tariff almost prohibitive. In regard to crystallized fruits, surely we should not make an exception in regard to these, when we consider that we have the sugar, produced in Natal, and there has been difficulty in finding shipping space for the export of our fruits. Possibly they come under a higher tariff elsewhere. As to imported fruits generally, the proposed tariff ought to be increased at least three times. In regard to item No. 40, seeds, these are imported free; but seeds for retailing in packets should bear a duty. There are a number of people raising seeds in this country; but seeds are sent in, from Germany principally, and the girls who have been employed in this country in making up seeds in packets for sale, even when they are imported in bulk, will find that they are knocked out of this occupation entirely. I hope the Minister will see his way to make a special line, that if seeds are brought in for retail sale in packets there shall be a tariff, so as to ensure work being available here for those who have hitherto been employed in this work.

†*Mr. STEYTLER:

I am very glad of the protection which is given to our farmers in connection with cheese. The protection is large and will help the farmers to produce more cheese, but I am sorry that as regards butter no difference is made in the protection between the old and the new tariff. The old tariff of ¼d. per lb. on butter was of course intended for butter imported from England, but we get no butter from England. We have with regard to butter to compete with Australia and other countries, and in this respect we are not assisted. I just want to mention the figures for importation of butter for the last few years. In it was 72,308 lbs., valued at £5,230; in 1922. 196,000 lbs., valued at £14.000; in 1923, 1,166,000 lbs., valued at £91,000, and in 1924 it went up further to 1,579,000 lbs., valued at £109,000. This shows that more and more butter is imported every year, and our production is suffering in consequence. The cattle farmers have suffered in the past few years since 1920, and must be protected. The protection of the butter industry will assist much. I am sorry that a representative of cattle farmers, the hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat), has spoken against protection, and said that we should compete with the world market. My experience is that we should first protect our industries in South Africa to make them strong, and then to compete with the world. We are still young in development. I do not know whether the hon. member for Queenstown spoke only for himself, I cannot believe that his view is the view of the cattle farmers in his constituency. I have received letters from his constituency to insist upon protection. I should like to propose—

That a protective import duty of 3d. per lb. be placed on imported butter. *The CHAIRMAN:

The hon. member cannot propose that now.

†*Mr. STEYTLER:

I was afraid of that but then I should very much like to make an appeal to the hon. Minister. This Government is called the farmers’ Government and has so far proved itself the friend of the farmer.

*An HON. MEMBER:

Do you still believe that?

†*Mr. STEYTLER:

Yes, they have already done very much more for the farmers than the former Government. We are much more satisfied, but I think that every member except the hon. member for Queenstown will agree with me that we ought to have increased protection for butter.

†*Mr. J. P. LOUW:

I reckon on the farmers of one House sitting on this side, but I am disappointed with the statement of the hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat) that he as a farmer is against protection. I am a moderate protectionist and I am opposed to it that the Government should go still further with duties on foodstuffs for the country but I do not see what objection there can be to putting 3½d. per lb. on chocolate and bon-bons if we have young industries in the country. What I cannot quite understand is that the income tax on vinegar is reduced from 1s. 1d. to 1s. seeing we have too much in the country. In the case of vinegar in vessels, it has been reduced to 7d.

*The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

There is no alteration.

†*Mr. J. P. LOUW:

Then I do not know what the figures before us mean. I want to call the Minister’s attention to baking powder on which the duty is 8d. I think that dumping is taking place because it is sold at 4s. 6d. per lb. and if you give 3d. more you get another lb. We always sold tartar for £3 10s. per 100 lbs. Now you can hardly get £1 for it. It is a great ingredient in the manufacture of cream of tartar and “tartaric.” I think that we have here to do with dumping.

†Mr. BARLOW:

We have the old cry here of 2d. a lb. more on butter, but protection alone on butter will not help. Australia pays 15s. or so a day for labour and yet it is able to land butter here in Cape Town at a profit to compete with the South African article. My hon. friend chaffed the Labour party. Chocolates are the only item in this particular group where the preference has been done away with. The Labour party has never yet advocated free trade in food.

Mr. ROBINSON:

In every other session than this one.

†Mr. BARLOW:

No. All over the world the Labour party favours protection. In the Imperial Parliament 17 Labour members voted for preference. We are not discussing this as a party question, but wish to attack it on a scientific footing. I know we have not the brains of hon. members opposite, but we are trying to do our best. Twopence a pound on bacon will not affect the hon. member. We don’t want to allow stuff to come in from other countries where the standard of living is lower than it is in South Africa.

†Mr. JAGGER:

Is the Minister going to incorporate the preference list in the tariff?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

It will come in the Bill as a schedule.

†Mr. JAGGER:

I think the question of cheese was well dealt with by the hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat). If our farmers can send cheese to England and gain prizes for it what is the good of asking for more protection? Increased production will be detrimental to the industry, and encourage inefficiency. A bit of competition does nobody any damage. We are not justified in a thing of this kind, in increasing the duty. The industry is flourishing. So much so that it can export to other countries and gain prizes. Then we have ham and bacon. It is true pigs have gone up in price, but that is no justification to call for an increased duty. My policy is the one laid down by the chief permanent officer of the department who says we want more milk from the cow. Exactly. That is the answer I give to the hon. member for Albert (Mr. Steytler). You are protecting milk heavily. I produce milk, 50 gallons a day, and I make it pay. We want more wool from the sheep and more business on our farms, and the Government are spending thousands of pounds to improve farming. They have a system of milk testing, and an official goes through the country and the farmers can have his services to improve the output of milk from the cows, yet at the same time we are putting a heavy duty on milk. These duties only encourage inefficient work. From what has been said I have not seen any justification for these three duties. I have taken three of the largest, which bear on the common people, and I would like to point out that the income of most people in this country is a fixed sum, and they have to make it go round. If they have to pay more for cheese and bacon they buy less, or they buy an inferior quality. I want also to draw attention to the matter of gelatine. He has put on there an ad valorem duty of 5 per cent. maximum, plus a suspended duty of 15 per cent. I bring this up not because I am interested in gelatine, but because it is the first opportunity we have had of discussing the important principle of suspended duties, which are unjust. Why should this House part with the right to put on such taxation as it thinks fit? In the British House of Commons a proposal of that kind would not be entertained for a minute. They maintain that any taxation should be by Parliament, and not be left to the Minister, and certainly not to an official. It is an extremely bad step. Why does he not put on the duty he wants, and leave over any additional duty till later on. Parliament is in session five months of the year, and this could be done. People will be coming whining to my hon. friend asking him to put on a suspended duty. I would like to see the entire suspended duties knocked out, and leave the responsibility to Parliament. Then I want to raise an important matter in regard to sugar. We have in this country a growing industry in jam making, and one that must grow, or it will be a bad look out for the fruit growers of this country. I am not discussing the duty. They have got to use a lot of sugar in jam making, and the industry must grow, because if you pick your fruit for export there is a certain amount you cannot send away, and that is sent to the jam factory. This industry at the present moment is handicapped because it has to buy sugar duty paid, or else local sugar, which is tantamount to the same thing. It is the jam factories which have imported the sugar from America at the lower prices. The industry is handicapped and cannot export jam from South Africa to compete in the outside markets if they have to buy duty-paid sugar. How can they compete with jam making in Great Britain, where they get free sugar? If they are handicapped the industry cannot flourish to any extent, and it cannot become of any importance except they can do an export trade. It is the same in other industries, agriculture and so forth. Once they get to the point of exporting they go ahead, but if they have to depend on the local market, where prices vary, it is a miserable business. Perhaps the Minister cannot put it in the tariff, but he can put it in the Bill, under which he gives a rebate on the sugar used in the manufacture of jam for export. That is done in other countries. It should not be impossible for the customs officers to keep a correct tally of the sugar used in the manufacture of jam, or to get a sworn statement as well from the manufacturer as to the amount of sugar used, and make a refund of it when the stuff is exported.

An HON. MEMBER:

Do you mean a rebate on the excise?

†Mr. JAGGER:

I know there is going to be a difficulty, because the sugar here is kept just above the imported price. They get the full value of the tariff.

An HON. MEMBER:

No, we don’t.

†Mr. JAGGER:

I want the manufacturers of jam to be put on a footing to sell in the world market, and it should not be outside the ability of the customs department to make an arrangement of that kind. That will increase the consumption of sugar enormously. This should become a great country for the export of jam. Australia manages to do it, and pays more for the labour. Why cannot we do the same?

†*Dr. STALS:

Under head 21 (a) mention is made of the duty of 15 per cent. ad valorem on imported food for children. This may be an unimportant item, but in the prevailing circumstances in South Africa it is one of the most important things that we should keep our eye on. About 4,000 white children under the age of one year die annually, not to speak of the large number of coloured and native children who die every year. My experience, and that of others, is that about 75 per cent. of the children die from stomach complaints, and as we have in South Africa so many poorly provided for and poor people who have great difficulty in buying the necessary children’s food it seems to me to be a national problem to make children’s food which is specially prepared as cheap as possible. Unfortunately I am unable to compare the new tariff with the old one.

*The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The new tariff is lower.

†*Dr. STALS:

Then I thank the Government. I hope they will also see to it in the future to keep this article as low as possible. As for butter, I hope that the hon. Minister will stick to his guns. The views in this House on this point are very divergent, but I think that we are all agreed on it that the South African farmer labours under particularly difficult circumstances. He has some times to go for days and for hundreds of miles to get to the first market. It therefore seems to me that the Government should provide proper protection. I think and I hope the time will come that we will produce a better quality and in larger quantities than to-day, but provisionally I hope that the hon. Minister will maintain his point of view.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

I want to say a few words on the sugar position in general. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Tagger) never loses an opportunity of stating his opinion in regard to the sugar industry of this country, and that opinion is the result of his free trade outlook. There are certain elements which must always be considered in connection with the sugar industry, and which are absent practically from every other industry of primary production. Wherever sugar is grown in any part of the world and consumed in the country in which it is grown, it, is grown behind a tariff wall. In the United States, in Canada, in Australia, in Europe, in every country where it is grown, it is grown behind a tariff wall.

Mr. JAGGER:

Surely not in Cuba.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

I said that in any country where it is grown and consumed, it is grown behind a tariff wall. Cuba is a growing country, not a consuming country. Its population is engaged almost solely in sugar production. Cuba has reached its limit of production. It is a country which is extraordinarily favoured by nature for the growth of sugar. It produced in the region of 4,500,000 tons this year, and it supplies a very large proportion of the sugar which is consumed in the U.S.A. The world produced about 20.000.000 tons of sugar, I believe I am correct in saying, this year, and a large proportion of that is beet sugar. I want to give the House some idea of the tariff walls behind which the greater portion of the sugar of the world is grown. In the United States they have a duty on refined sugar of 9s. 5d. per 100 lbs. They produce in the United States and in countries which belong to the United States 2.000,000 tons of sugar. That sugar comes in free into the United States. But their consumption is some 5,000,000 tons, so they get 3,000,000 tons from Cuba on which they pay a duty of 7s. 11d., that is to say, there is a preferential rebate of the difference between 9s. 5d. and 7s. 11d. in favour of Cuba. That sugar is brought into the United States, it is refined in great refineries, and what is not wanted for consumption in the United States is exported overseas. The sugar growers of the United States are in precisely the same position as we are in this country. In Louisiana the sugar planters are growing sugar under a protection of 9s. 5d. per 100 lbs., while we, in South Africa, are growing it under a protection of 3s. 6d. per 100 lbs. In Australia they have got an embargo upon the importation of sugar from anywhere in the world for three years. Their duty is 8s. 4d. per 100 lbs. In France there is a duty of 23s. 7d. per 100 lbs. in regard to beet sugar. Behind that tariff wall the sugar growers of France grow their sugar. Germany has a protective duty of 18s. 3d. per 100 lbs. and Belgium a maximum tariff of 46s. 2d. and a minimum tariff of 15s. Holland, under the old duty, had a tariff on South African raw sugar of 20s. 8d. and on refined sugar of 22s. 2d., but has recently brought in a new tariff, I understand, which is 12s. 10d. per 100 lbs. and an additional 8 per cent. ad valorem. Portuguese East Africa has a tariff wall of 22s. 3d.. Czecho Slovakia a duty of 19s. 2d., and Canada, which is also growing beet, has a duty of 8s. per 100 lbs.

Mr. BARLOW:

What about the West Indies?

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

The West Indies is an exporting country. There are certain countries which have ideal climatic conditions for growing the sugar cane, and those are exporting countries, pure and simple, and they employ the cheapest labour without any factory legislation, and are able to export their sugar at a very cheap price overseas.

An HON. MEMBER:

Are wages cheaper in Jamaica than they are in Zululand?

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

I believe they are. The wages per ton of sugar is the deciding point. These countries are growing cane on land which yields an excellent crop under conditions which we cannot compete against. That is the reason why we need protection. We are growing sugar in South Africa under a protective duty of 3s. 6d. per 100 lbs., and I have laid before the House the figures under which other countries are producing it. From the earliest days sugar has always been a political question—it has been the sport of politicians everywhere. The beet industry has grown up under the bounty system, and has grown up everywhere under tariff walls. If this country were to decide to do away with the tariff on sugar in South Africa, as I explained to the House the other day, it would mean our very rapid destruction. I want to tell the House what the position is in regard to sugar in Cuba. The sugar produced in Cuba in 1922-1923 was 4,467,000 tons. Of that amount 2,500,000 tons was owned by American refineries in New York. Another half million was owned by Europeans and a million and a half by Cubans, which means that the whole sugar industry of Cuba is more or less in the hands of the sugar financiers of New York. Their control of the world’s sugar supply is so great that quite recently they lent four million dollars to the German beet sugar industry. The result of this, states the “Times,” is to—

tend to put the American group in complete command of the situation, because, in addition to their present control of nearly all the production in the United States, Hawaii, the Philippines and Cuba, they direct the policy of the German sugar manufacturers, and they will be able to dictate the sugar prices of the world.

That is what our poor little struggling sugar industry of South Africa is up against. The hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) (Mr. Barlow) said there was no sugar dumping. I have tried to explain under what conditions sugar is being produced in those countries I have mentioned I want to put the South African producer in the same position as the Louisiana sugar grower in the United States. What is the position? He produces the same commodity under very much similar conditions, except that he has an annual crop against our two-year crop. He produces his sugar under a tariff of 9s. 7d. per 100 lbs., as against ours of 3s. 6d. per 100 lbs. The Board of Trade and Industries has defined dumping as follows—

Ordinary dumping shall mean the sale of goods for export to South Africa on such terms as the export price is less than the home consumption price on which goods for export are sold.

These are the figures. On April 2nd last—and these are confirmed by the Customs Department—the home price for refined sugar in New York, that is the Louisiana sugar, was 5.95 cents a pound. The export price was 3.70 cents per lb., a difference of 2.15 cents, which is about 8s. 8d. per 100 lbs., upon which the refiners get a rebate of duty. Some of this sugar may have come from Louisiana, or it may not. This sugar is imported into this country and is being landed here under the home consumption price of 8s. 8d. per 100 lbs.

Mr. JAGGER:

The home consumption price includes the tax.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

What is the object of prevention of dumping? It is that the producer in a given country shall not be in a worse position than the producer in another country.

Mr. ROUX:

If you had to sacrifice the sugar eater or the sugar manufacturer which would you do?

Mr. MADELEY:

You must not ask questions like that.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

I take it if there is any logic at all in dumping it should be considered from the point of view of the producer in this country and the point of view of the producer who is sending it to this country. If any commodity is being dumped in this country under the price at which the producer sells it in the country from which it comes, I hold that is dumping.

Mr. BARLOW:

That applies to whisky.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

Oh, no. Here you have the United States growing within its own borders two million tons of sugar a year. That two million tons is protected by a duty of 9s. 7d. per 100 lbs. If there was no sugar industry there, possibly the refineries would be at Cuba and it would be a different position. As it is we are penalized to the extent of 8s. 8d. per 100 lbs. If, for instance, it costs us as much in this country to produce as it costs the Louisiana planters to produce, then obviously we should get the same price for our sugar, but if Louisiana sugar is sold here at 8s. 8d. per 100 lbs. less than the consumption price in America, we must go under. The logic of the situation is this. Whatever technical difficulties there may be, whatever legal arguments there may be, the fact remains that the South African sugar planter is asked to sell his sugar under the price at which the Louisiana sugar planter is selling his. It is impossible to distinguish between Cuba sugar refined in New York and Louisiana sugar refined in New York. The sugar coming here may have been grown in Louisiana. In regard to the question of jam, in a sugar producing country there is always trouble between the jam manufacturer and the sugar manufacturer; naturally, because jam consists half of sugar. The jam manufacturer in this country is protected to the extent of 30 per cent. ad valorem. The ad valorem duty on sugar at the present moment is about 17 per cent., so that relatively the jam manufacturer is in a much better position than the sugar manufacturer, who also has to send his surplus production overseas. In our case the only sugar sent overseas is raw sugar for refining. I just want to make one observation to the House. People talk about sugar as if it were all of one quality like flour. It is not. There are many qualities; one may fetch 15s. per 100 lbs., another 25s.; it depends upon the quality. I think if hon. members will only study this free from bias—it is a very valuable industry to this country—and see what relatively small protection it enjoys in face of the tariff of the whole world, I think they will begin to realize that the sugar industry is nothing but an asset to this country.

†Mr. ROUX:

There is only one point that I wish to call the Minister’s attention to in connection with this tariff, namely, that a rebate should be allowed on the sugar which is used for making jam for export. Hon. members will agree that we should protect industries showing vitality. An industry which is getting along fairly well and which is almost without protection is the fruit culture and business. We have already exported more than 1,000,000 boxes of deciduous fruits via Cape Town. Many trees have been planted. The fruit harvest is becoming greater and one way of exporting it is by making jam. I want the Minister now or at a subsequent opportunity to take into consideration the granting of a rebate of the excise and the customs duty on the sugar which is used for jam for export. It will make a fairly large difference and I request the Minister to take this into consideration. As regards the general protection of sugar the public feel that an import duty of 3s. 6d. per 100 lbs. is a little high on an article which is used by nearly everybody. It is almost just as necessary as bread.

†Mr. MADELEY:

I do not think the hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls), is quite right in his deduction. He was arguing, I think, that there is a differentiation in favour of Cuban sugar, as against South African produced sugar, of 8s. 4d. per 100 lbs. But the point rests with the Cuban sugar, and my hon. friend has been misleading the committee, because every argument he has been making is based on the fact that there is an 8s. 4d. withdrawal on the part of America. That is in respect of Cuban sugar that has previously been imported into America, and immediately it is exported elsewhere it is subject to the withdrawal of the original duty, so that you are exactly where you were, and you have the same price at which the sugar was produced in Cuba. Would the hon. member argue that there is an 8s. 4d. differentiation against South Africa in the case of sugar imported direct from Cuba?

Mr. NEL:

Are you against protecting the sugar farmer?

†Mr. MADELEY:

That is not what we are arguing. I am taking up the point made by the hon. member for Zululand, that there is a differentiation in favour of Cuban sugar, as compared with South African, of 8s. 4d. In taking up that point I am hoping to be able to prove that he is wrong. The question of whether it is crude or refined is beside the point. It is only imported into America for refinement purposes, and if it were imported into South Africa for refinement, I presume it would be for consumption. The hon. member has missed the point. We claim that South African sugar should be produced for South African consumption, not for export for the purpose of making money for the sugar king, and the real test I want this House to apply to the whole question, whether of sugar or anything else, is, if the sugar producers of South Africa, in its finished form ready for consumption, were to reduce their price, would they still be making a profit? We have no means of testing the question absolutely until we know exactly how much it costs you to produce the sugar, how much you can supply it to the consumer at, with a reasonable profit, and how that compares with the price to the consumer in South Africa to-day. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Immediately Cuban sugar started to be re-exported from America, and imported into South Africa at a lower price, what happened? Down came the price of South African-produced sugar. I understand it was something like 5s. a 100 lbs., which the reduction represented to the consumer. In examining the whole of this question, you have to take all the factors into consideration. For instance, we have to consider, in coming to a conclusion as to whether an industry is run in the interests of the country, what wages it pays, what sort of men and women it is employing, and whether it is people of the South African nation it is employing, and whether it is keeping up the stamina of the South African by the conditions it imposes on those producing the sugar. These are very important factors to be considered when we are asked to give exceptional protection. The hon. member has forgotten to tell the committee that there is an additional protection which applies to all imported articles, which all these commodities which are locally produced have, namely, the freightage which has to be paid. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) has put his finger right on the spot when he says that the vast bulk of the consumers of South Africa, like those of every other country, are the wage and salary earners. They have their fixed means. I am firmly in favour of protecting industries from their inception, or, if you like, to bolster up industries provided they are dependent upon the raw products of this country; but we have always to take into consideration, as the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) says, the fact that immediately you raise the price of the necessaries of life to the man who is in receipt of a fixed salary or wage, you are causing him to go without something. That is inevitable. I would like to know how the fostering of the sugar industry is going to operate with regard to those engaged in that industry and earning wages and salaries with regard to all other commodities; because all these have to be taken into consideration. The hon. member for Zululand said that sugar, wherever it is produced throughout the world, it has been behind, more or less, high tariff walls. He made his exceptions, of course. If I remember correctly, Germany, which built up its sugar industry on its beet crop, built up its sugar industry on a bounty-fed system, not a tariff, and what was the result? The result was the same as we had in the case of all artificially-maintained industries for export, for money-making by distribution outside the borders of their own country. The result was that in London you could buy, at that time, German beet sugar at 2d. a pound, and the very man who was producing that sugar in Germany had to pay 6d. a pound for it. It only shows you how very carefully you have to examine a position such as this, and we must be very careful how we are influenced by the artful suggestions and arguments of hon. members who are themselves interested in the particular industry they want to foster. There is one thing I want to drive into the mind of the Minister, for I know what has actuated him. A tariff system is the most dangerous and unscientific method of building up industries. This House having once accepted the tariff system, then it has seriously to turn its attention to safeguards. In building up industries you have to have two most important checks—one to secure that the consumer shall not be bled, and the other power to fix prices on a reasonable basis of profit. Then it is no use establishing industries if they do not provide reasonably profitable employment for the manhood of the country. The next important link is to secure conditions and wages mat will safeguard to the workers that standard of living necessary for the dignity of the South African nation. I ask the Minister not to be led too easily by the specious arguments of the hon. member for molasses town.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

The hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Madeley) is quite wrong in stating that the 8s. 8d. difference is merely a rebate of the duty that has been paid. Sugar entering the United States from foreign countries pays a duty of 9s. 5d. per 100 lbs., while sugar from Cuba pays a duty of 7s. 8d. per 100 lbs.—a preference in favour of Cuba of 1s. 7d.

Mr. MADELEY:

What is the application of that?

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

The New York refiner, who exports the sugar, does not get 8s. 8d rebate. You have to allow this difference of 1s. 7d., so that, instead of the Cuban sugar obtaining a protection of 9s. 5d., it is 7s. 8d. The difference in the home consumption and export prices is not the difference between the duty paid on Cuban sugar. My hon. friend puts up the astounding doctrine that if South Africa cannot produce sugar as cheaply as Cuba can, then we ought to go under.

Mr. MADELEY:

No.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

Then I cannot follow your argument. Refined sugar is being sold cheaper in South Africa than in any other country.

Mr. MADELEY:

So it ought.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

If we had not a sugar industry, would you be buying sugar as cheap as you are to-day?

Mr. BARLOW:

If you were not alive you would be dead.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

With regard to the conditions under which the South African sugar industry is carried on, the heads of that industry have invited the Government to appoint a commission of enquiry into it. The fact remains that you cannot produce £5,000,000 worth of commodities without the whole of the community being thereby enriched. Then my hon. friend has brought in another extraordinary argument. He points out that the sugar industry of Germany was created by bounties, and that because of those bounties sugar was sold cheaper in England, Does my hon. friend want people to sell their sugar here at three halfpence per lb., while they sell it at sixpence a lb. in their own country? He desires bounty-fed sugar to be poured into South Africa.

Mr. MADELEY:

That is not fair.

†Mr. PEARCE:

I cannot understand the arguments used by the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) against the suspended duty. The capitalistic classes all over the world are looking for countries where they can manufacture at the lowest possible rate. The cotton mill owners in Lancashire are erecting factories in India. The jute manufacturers of Dundee are no longer producing there, but in India and China, because manufacturing in those countries are cheaper than it is in Scotland. In 1921 £22,000,000 was withdrawn from British industries and invested in Germany and Austria, because of the lower economic condition of the German and Austrian people, which enabled greater profits to be made. The United States capitalist class realize that by keeping control of Cuban sugar they would be able to exploit the cheaper workers in Cuban. We have the right to protect the people of this country, not by giving them articles cheaper and no work, but by giving them work—therefore, money—so that they can live under decent conditions. In the jade industry it was recently found that the cutting of the stone could not be undertaken at a reasonable price in South Africa, and it was ascertained that a jade bead would cost 5s. 3d. in South Africa, 4s. 5d. to cut in England, against 7d. in Germany and 2d. in China. This shows how economic conditions influence the cost of an article. The arguments of the hon. members for Natal who are interested in sugar are put from their point of view. It is correct from their point of view, because they do not calculate on the figures relating to other industries. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) looks upon it from a importer’s point of view only. We have instances that unless this country produces its own commodities it will never be the country we ought to try and make it. By producing commodities in this country we keep the money in the country, and circulate it for the benefit of all concerned. Let me now emphasize it in the protection of a special commodity.

†The CHAIRMAN:

The hon. member is discussing the general question of free trade versus protection. I cannot allow that.

Mr. PEARCE:

Will the Chairman allow me to discuss the question of the different costs—

†The CHAIRMAN:

I cannot allow it.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

While the Committee have been busy discussing the details of the tariff we have had a general discussion on general principles. On two definite occasions these principles have been decided in the House, on the motion to go into the Committee of Supply and the Committee of Ways and Means. We have had this afternoon again the same points. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) has gone back to the general policy of protection.

Mr. JAGGER:

Only as applied to certain items in the tariff.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Yes I agree he has dealt with certain definite items on the tariff, but his objections come from the fact that he is a free trader and is opposed to the general policy underlying the tariff. The hon. member for Troyeville (Mr. Kentridge) has dealt with the question of preference. This is a question in regard to which the Government has laid down its policy and on two occasions the House has practically decided with regard to that policy. Another point has been raised on the advisability of differentiating between various countries with regard to the customs duty. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) has dealt with the question of suspended duties. The hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) (Mr. Barlow) has been generally uncomplimentary to the tariff as a whole, he talks about it as an unscientific tariff. We have had a general discussion on the question of dumping duties on sugar. I cannot satisfy the curiosity of members. The Board of Trade and industries is going into the matter carefully and after the Government have had the report they will go into the question. I don’t propose to go into all these questions now, because the House has decided on the general principles underlying this Budget. Take the question of preference raised by the hon. member for Troyeville. We have informed the House that the Government has decided it will continue to grant preference in regard to particular items from Great Britain and the dominions, but we intend cutting it down by a considerable amount. It may be unfortunate that confectionery is one of the items where the preference disappears. Unfortunately the rebate had to disappear from many items, but these rebates have been considerably increased in regard to certain specific items. In carrying out this general policy it is also unfortunate that we have not been able to apply it to as many items as hon. members would have liked us to, but we cannot afford to give preference to the same amount that Great Britain previously enjoyed. In regard to differentiating in articles coming from various countries, apart from retaining the principle of preference in regard to articles coming from Great Britain and the dominions, we do not intend to differentiate in goods coming from other countries to us. Because the labour conditions in some countries may not be as satisfactory as in our own, it will be impossible for us to discriminate. I want to come to specific items in the clause which have been dealt with. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) has moved a reduction in the items of cheese, bacon and ham and butter and milk. As I have said the hon. member is frankly against protection for the farmer or for any other industry. The hon. member for Durban (Central) (Mr. Robinson) says he is a protectionist, but he cannot withstand having a tilt at the Labour party, and he does not want protection for the farming community. Where protection is given it is only after the industry has been investigated by the Board of Trade and they have come to the conclusion that protection is wanted. That applies to the dairy industry and to the bacon and ham industry. With regard to the dairy industry we have this position that at a certain period of the year we have a glut of dairy products whilst at another time of the year there is a scarcity. The farmer wants protection where there is a scarcity after he has been forced to accept the smaller or uneconomic prices for his articles, and when the prices do improve, he does not want other countries to have the right to dump their articles in this country. That has happened in regard to butter. We have a dumping duty to-day in regard to butter and we had to go to the assistance of the farmer and give him protection by putting on a dumping duty. Take bacon. Provision is made that if the price of bacon is unduly raised the duty will at once be decreased. Provision is made that the 3d. duty may be reduced 1½d. if the board finds the price of bacon has been unduly raised.

An HON. MEMBER:

What do you mean by unduly raised?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

It is a question the board will decide upon. We have heard that bacon has been raised.

Mr. HEATLIE:

They are paying the same price for pigs.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) bears out what I say.

Mr. JAGGER:

That is so.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

With regard to other products hon. members will see the difference has been provided for the maximum and minimum duty. If they don’t play fair the board will at once recommend to the Government and the duties might be decreased. In regard to milk, here again the duty has been increased because we want to protect a particular industry that is at present established and another industry that wants to become established here.

Mr. JAGGER:

One factory?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Nestle’s want to come to this country; they are on the point of coming here and establishing a factory here.

Mr. JAGGER:

I doubt it. I don’t say I doubt your word.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I may inform the House that in many instances where we have provided for protection we have information that various interests are already contemplating coming to this country and taking advantage of the protection we are offering. I am sure hon. members will find in a few months’ time we have done some good in that respect, that these tariffs have actually resulted in industries coming in.

Mr. JAGGER:

With the application of the Wage Bill as well?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I think we are still, in spite of the Wage Bill, offering sufficiently attractive conditions for industries to come and get established here. In regard to these few farmers’ products, the hon. member, of course, dislikes protection in any form, but I am quite sure that this House will in these cases, as in other cases, approve of the action taken by the Government to afford this moderate protection to the farming industries concerned. The hon. member has raised the question of the duty on sugar. Here again the hon. member for Bloemfontein (North) (Mr. Barlow) will see that provision is made to reduce the protection given to sugar by 6d. if at any time the board is of opinion that a reduction is warranted.

Mr. JAGGER:

Where is that stated?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The hon. member will see that 4s. 6d. is the maximum duty, and that 3s. 6d. is the minimum.

Sir THOMAS SMARTT:

That is the bargaining tariff.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

And also a threat.

Gen. SMUTS:

Is a general power to be given in the Bill to apply the minimum tariff in proper cases?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Yes Hon. members will see that on a number of items there is a difference between the maximum and the minimum tariff. That is for two purposes—one is for negotiation with the other dominions, and other countries, and the other is a threat if an industry does not play fair.

Mr. BARLOW:

Will the Minister give up revenues?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I think in many cases it will be found that where the duties are decreased he gets more revenue. Then the hon. member for Pretoria (West) (Mr. Hay) has raised the question of Item 17, liquid eggs. I agree with him that we get this stuff from China and the duty which is now being proposed is practically prohibitive. We don’t want these goods to come in. Then the hon. member has raised the question of fruit. The duty on fruit has not been raised at all. We are, of course, getting in small quantities of fruit, but, on the whole, there is no competition in that regard, and the board has not recommended any change in regard to fruit. Then under Item 14 a higher rate is payable than under the old item. A change has been made in regard to crystalized fruits for the purpose of taking that (particular article out of that particular class, and putting it under class 14 where a higher duty is provided. The hon. member has also taken exception to the provision for the admission of seeds. That is again something required by the farmers. I understand that many kinds of seeds have still to be imported, although we supply our own requirements to a certain extent. Under these circumstances it is not advisable to put a heavy duty on seeds.

Mr. HAY:

In packets?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Even seeds in packets are used by our farmers, and I do not think it would be in the public interest to put a higher duty on them.

*The hon. member for Stellenbosch (Mr. J. P. Louw) spoke about baking powder, and pointed out that the industry here has to contend with strong competition from oversea. Well, he will see that the duty has been considerably raised. The same applies to tartar, which the wine industry is interested in.

The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) has mentioned gelatine and in connection with that he has discussed the principle of the suspended duties. Gelatine, I may state, is also an industry which is likely to be established here. An Australian firm is making enquiries, and will probably come here. The hon. member attacked the principle of a suspended duty. The Board of Trade is of opinion that this is a means whereby you can give immediate and effective protection to an industry about to be established. In many cases it would be necessary to act at once, and not to have to wait until Parliament sits far the necessary legislation to be passed. After all, sufficient safeguards will be introduced. The increased duty which will be given will have to be approved by Parliament at the next session. The hon. member for Liesbeek (Mr. Pearce) has raised the question of making provision in cases where we give preference to British goods coming to this country so as to ensure that at least a certain percentage of British labour and British material enters into the manufacture thereof. That we are providing for.

Mr. BARLOW:

What about the over-riding tariff of 40 per cent.?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Yes, the hon. member (Mr. Barlow) has asked me on what principle the ad valorem duties will he calculated. I do not know what exactly he means by the over-riding tariff. He will see that, in all cases, we provide for a certain definite tariff.

Mr. BARLOW:

Your tariff may even go up to 100 per cent. Why not make it 40 per cent.?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

It is true that in some cases, when you have a low-priced article, you must make a specific duty if you want to protect a particular industry. If you have an ad valorem rate in the case of a low-priced article you must give the protection which you want to give to an industry. The hon. member asked me how we are going to define ad valorem rates for the purpose of collecting the duty. That is provided for in Clause 13 of the Bill which will lay down that, for the purpose of assessing the amount of customs duty on goods liable to the ad valorem rates, the value of such goods shall be taken to be the domestic value, plus the extra cost of packing, etc., for export, carriage to port of shipment, and all other expenses incidental to placing goods on board ship. We know the difficulties in regard to domestic value, dumping law, and so on, but we can discuss these matters much better when we bring forward the Bill.

*The hon. member for Hopetown (Dr. Stals) has brought up the matter of children’s food. As I have said, the duty on such articles is actually decreased. They now come under the class of 15 per cent., formerly they fell in a higher class. The hon. member for Ceres (Mr. Roux) and the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) have asked that a rebate shall be granted on the sugar which is used for jam for export. There is, of course, a, difficulty because different duties are paid on inland and foreign sugar. It is, however, a matter which the Government can consider that if the whole amount cannot be granted as a rebate then, at any rate, a certain portion can be granted. We have had a very full discussion, and I hope the House will now be able to come to a decision in regard to the particular items which my hon. friend has challenged.

Sir THOMAS SMARTT:

We are all extremely obliged to the Minister for the full statement he has made, but I am still not quite clear about the papers he has placed before the House. The Minister, when he introduced his taxation proposals before, introduced to the House a special schedule of, I think, 23 items, placed upon what he called the “preference list.” He pointed out that the old list, which contained 250 or 260 preference articles, had been cut down to this number. In these cases, irrespective of the ordinary tariff, these British goods will get preference, as laid down in the schedule. Now, in the revised schedule he has placed on the Table, there is a tariff with a maximum and a minimum, what he formerly said was his bargaining tariff. Has he departed from the original preference which gave special treatment to British goods irrespective of the maximum or minimum tariff, because I find the items mentioned are also mentioned in the maximum and minimum tariff. If that is the case it must appear that there is no preference to Britain over and above the maximum and minimum tariff given to any other country, which he led us believe was going to be the case. This means that Britain would not get any better terms than any other country that gets the maximum and minimum tariff. There were three schedules, the special preferential schedule and the minimum and maximum schedules.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I will explain to the hon. member. In regard to the schedule which he has in front of him, the Bill will provide, in the case of the items mentioned there, that Great Britain will receive a minimum tariff, and no other country will get it in respect of those particular items. This is the proposed draft. Perhaps I should read it. I am referring to the customs duty charged on goods specified in part 1 of the second schedule—

Under this Act shall be rebated to the extent shown in the fourth column thereof, in respect of goods being grown, produced or manufactured in the United Kingdom, which are imported from there for consumption in the Union.

Then I provide, further, for articles on which we give rebates, articles from the dominions. Then there will be another clause which will provide for the bargaining, but it will exclude these special items. Hon. members need not be afraid. I am going to carry out the assurance I gave when the proposals were introduced.

Mr. BARLOW:

There are only 32 articles; Great Britain asked for 35.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

We were given to understand, unofficially, the articles upon which they would like a special treatment, and my department has selected the articles which it was thought would be most acceptable.

†Mr. STUTTAFORD:

I would like to refer to the question of the suspended duties. The Minister does not seem to appreciate the difficulty of the merchant with regard to these suspended duties. If he takes up the position that it may be necessary to put them on very suddenly in order to meet some prospective manufacturer who is going to start, then I must point out that if any manufacturer is going to start in any considerable way he is not going to get very far in seven months. It seems to me that he will not be in a position of producing within seven months. That is the seven months in which this House is not in session. I should like to impress upon the Minister the difficulty in which the merchant is put in this case. It takes three months, say, from the time the goods are ordered to the time they are delivered. In that period the merchant may find that the duty has been increased from 5 per cent. to 15 per cent., and the whole of his purchases may be valueless, or he may have to lose 10 per cent. on the whole of these indents. It seems impossible for him to indent under these conditions. I would suggest if the Minister does nothing else he should in this Bill clearly lay down that any suspended duty shall not be put on except with three months’ notice. That means the merchant must be in a position to know that when he gets goods out here he will not find the tariff already against him. It seems to me to put the merchant into an impossible position, to vary the duties not only during the session of Parliament, but when Parliament is not sitting. They can be varied, by a stroke of the pen, by the Board of Trade. I would like to refer also to another statement of the Minister. We understood, when this tariff was put in front of the House, that there were to be two columns, a general column and a bargaining column. The minimum tariff was to be a bargaining tariff. The Minister now says that this minimum tariff, in addition to being a bargaining tariff, is also to be a “threat” tariff. That is, that the Board of Trade, with another stroke of the pen, can reduce the tariff on any given item, because in their opinion—

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Not a given item; on specified items.

†Mr. STUTTAFORD:

—the manufacturers in that industry are asking too much for their product. He suggested certain factories would be coming and starting in this country; but, in the first place, he is going to say to them: “You have a tariff of 15 per cent. in your favour.” He is then going to say to them: “We do not guarantee that it is going to remain 15 per cent., as when you wake up one morning, if you are not conducting your business properly, you will find it has gone down to 5 per cent.” You won’t know your tariff, and now that the Wage Bill has gone through, you may come to certain arrangements with your workpeople in regard to wages, but the Minister may come in from above with a board absolutely independent of the workers and employers in that trade, and institute a wage that is also going to knock you out. I suggest that, with these two items alone, this uncertain tariff, and the uncertain Wage Bill, the Minister will not get any manufacturer to come into this country and put considerable capital into it—

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

We shall see.

†Mr. STUTTAFORD:

—if the manufacturer, at the time, knows these two dangers are in front of him. I can understand the two-line tariff: but I cannot understand the minimum tariff being used as a threat to any manufacturer, that, at any given moment, he may find the whole conditions of his trade altered by a reduction of 10 per cent. to 15 per cent. of the tariff in his favour.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

It can always be done by Parliament.

†Mr. STUTTAFORD:

This is going to be done by an independent board, the Board of Trade, and to me it makes trade in this country an absolute gamble. Suspended duties make trading for the merchant a gamble, and the sword of Damocles—the minimum column makes trading for the manufacturer a gamble. I do ask the Minister to give a little certainty and base to the fiscal position in this country.

*Mr. NIEUWENHUIZE:

The hon. Minister has stated that much has been said about the general principle of free trade and protection but I want more particularly to direct his attention to paragraph 15, that is the import duty of wheat. I notice with regret, I must say, that the duty on imported wheat has remained precisely the same as the former year. Up to the present it has been 1s. per 100 lbs. or 2s. per bag and it has remained so. I know Mr. Chairman that you, when you were not yet in the chair, always took a great interest in this matter and regularly took part in the debate about it and pleaded in the interests of the wheat farmer. I wish for the information of the hon. Minister to mention the actual costs that are connected with this industry. I am speaking now about the Transvaal but I believe that the figures are more or less the same for the other provinces as well. I have gone into the cost of production on a grain farm of 80 morgen and I come to the conclusion that until the wheat is despatched the costs of tilling of the ground come to £6 2s. per morgen, calculated at an average yield of 8 bags per morgen bringing the cost of a bag therefore to 15s. 3d. The threshing of the wheat comes to 1s. 6d., the bags to 1s., the transport to 2s. 6d. on the average, and the commission to the co-operative society to 1s.. a total of a little over £1. I will now assume that it is only £1. That does not include what in the Cape Colony is p significant cost, namely the expense of fertilizer, and not even the due wage of the farmer himself for his supervision, etc., the great risk of a bad year through rust, locusts, hail, drought, etc. All this I have not included and without all these things a bag of corn comes to £1. Now let us agree that the sale price of a bag of wheat was £1 5s.—this is regarded as a good price—then it is little in comparison with what a bag of wheat produces when it has once been manufactured because 90 loaves of 2 lbs. at 8d. per loaf are baked from a bag of wheat, and 4s. for the bran. This works out at £3 4s. Therefore the farmer only gets about 30 per cent of the actual value. I just want to take a few concrete examples; one of a man who cultivates his own ground and one of a man who has worked for one-third of the yield. I take a farm of 20 morgen. In the case of a man who owns the ground the yield of 160 bags is sold at £1 5s. producing £200, the costs in accordance with the aforementioned calculation are 160 x £1 or £160. Thus there remains a balance of £40 for his work during the whole year. In the case of a man who works for two-thirds of the yield it is even still less. Then his share is two-thirds of 160 bags, 106 bags at £1 5s. per bag or £133 16s. 8d. The costs in this case are £106 therefore there only remains about £26 as the proceeds for a whole year’s work. Now one usually proceeds on the assumption that the price of wheat in Australia and Canada must be the actual guide to us in fixing what a bag of wheat should cost here. I think that that is a wrong method of calculation. I think it would be more in the interests of farmers to take the cost of production as a basis. About 1,000,000 bags of wheat are imported and it costs landed here about 2s. 6d. per bag, to that must be added 2s. duty, total 4s. 6d. This is then added to the price of Australian and Canadian wheat to arrive at our prices without taking our own costs of production into account. I just wish to point out to the hon. Minister the detailed report from 1923 of the Board of Trade and Industries who went carefully into the matter and had given a detailed report. The conclusion of the board was that the import duty on wheat should be raised. The then Government did not see their way to do this but this does not prevent the wheat farmers in general feeling that the time has come to increase the customs duties. I therefore hope that the hon. Minister will in the circumstances still be prepared to meet the wheat farmers by increasing the import duty on wheat.

†Mr. KENTRIDGE:

I regard the suspended duties as probably the best feature of the tariff, inasmuch as they will enable the Minister so to adjust the duties as to secure proper conditions of labour for those engaged in a particular industry and also in the absence of provisions for fixing prices to obtain some consideration for the consumer. I again impress upon the Minister the arguments advanced from these benches in the earlier part of the afternoon. I admire the skilful manner in which the Minister glided over the points raised from these benches. The question of Imperial preference has been definitely decided and accepted by the House, but the point that we have raised is the detailed application of the principle in connection with particular articles. The Minister has pointed out that so far as 22 items are concerned the rebates have disappeared entirely.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

And in some cases have been increased.

†Mr. KENTRIDGE:

The paint I wish again to put to the Minister is that where a duty is imposed it should be regulated so as to secure that the article has been produced on a sound labour basis and has not been made under sweated conditions. In the vast majority of cases the Minister by doing away with the rebate has not benefited South Africa in the least, and our trade will be diverted to parts of the world where goods are manufactured under sweated conditions. This will react prejudicially both to Great Britain and to South Africa, and we shall have to compete with the countries where sweated conditions of labour prevail. The Minister has told us in a rather off-hand manner that it would be impossible to differentiate between one country and another with regard to conditions of labour prevailing in those countries. But if it is possible to ensure, and he told the hon. member for Liesbeek (Mr. Pearce) that he would, that the major portion of the goods enjoying the British preference shall have been made in Great Britain, it will equally be impossible to ascertain the conditions under which imported articles are made, particularly those imported from Italy, Germany and Belgium. On no account should we assist the development of industries on the foundation of sweated labour.

Brig.-Gen. ARNOTT:

I cannot understand why sugar should also always upset hon. members on the cross benches. Being a sweet product I should have thought it would sweeten them rather than make them nasty. The South African sugar industry raises £5,000,000 worth of produce from the soil. It does not use more than half of one per cent. in imported material in the production of that five millions. All the rest is South African produce and if there is any industry worth encouraging, it is a South African industry which is a primary production, and which employs a large number of people, pays good wages and conforms with conditions so dear to the hearts of the labour party. It also provides sugar at a lower price than any other sugar-producing country in the world, which is also a consuming country. Every other country has a high protective tariff. In the month of May the difference of the home cost and the export price in Germany was 17s. 10¼d. per 100 lbs., France and Belgium were the same, Holland was 31s. 3d., Poland 29s. 9½d. These people were paying this amount above the export value, and they could only do that, because no one was allowed to sell sugar against them. In this country the Government has taken another step and is threatening the industry with a minimum tariff of 3s. 6d., less the shilling, which gives an effective tariff of 2s. 6d. That is to be enforced if the industry breaks any conditions of labour, etc. Is the whole industry to be penalised because one mill breaks some of the regulations? Sugar today is selling at 24s. f.o.b. at Durban for number one refined, and as regards the price, the sugar people have no control over that after it leaves the mill.

An HON. MEMBER:

Do you want a higher duty on sugar?

Brig.-Gen. ARNOTT:

Yes. We are at the mercy of Java. Java sugar is at the present moment being shipped to India, because there is a shortage in India. As soon as India gets its crop Java will send the sugar here, and they are reproducing it with black labour without supervision or proper sanitary conditions. Australia prohibits the importation of sugar. They had a tariff of 22s. 6d. per 100 lbs., but they found it was not sufficient, so they prohibit sugar altogether. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) referred to jam. There is to be a conference next month to try to come to some modus vivendi in this industry, but everything will depend on the price of sugar. There is an amount of moisture in sugar. If you want a dry sandy sugar, pure white, then you have to pay for it, and by sandy sugar I mean sugar that will run. I believe the jam people receive a rebate from the excise.

Mr. JAGGER:

I don’t think so.

Brig.-Gen. ARNOTT:

Well they receive a rebate in this way that being larger buyers they get it at a cheaper price. There is no cry about soap, and soap is more highly protected than sugar, and the ordinary household pays more for soap than sugar. The protection on soap is 4s. 9d. against 3s. 6d. on sugar.

†Mr. HAY:

I would like the Minister to notice, in regard to article number 45—tea, that tea in packets or tins not exceeding 10 lbs. in weight pays 6d. and in large containers only 4d. That difference is on purpose to encourage the employment of those who put up tea in packets. I ask the Minister why he makes this difference in regard to tea and not with regard to seeds. I asked for it in regard to seeds as in the case of tea. He said that we must produce seeds for the farmer as cheaply as possible, but it is not fair. You are throwing out of employment a number of people whose occupation has been to put up seeds in small packets and the packets are printed in this country. I ask the Minister to be consistent and not to attempt to justify this discrimination between tea and seeds in bulk or in packets.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The answer is simple. You can apply the principle where the article is dutiable. Seeds are free in whatever form they come in.

Amendments put and negatived.

Class I, as printed, put and agreed to.

On Class II,

†*Dr. STALS:

I do not wish to take up the time of the House any longer than is necessary. When we last discussed this matter the Minister of Finance made a statement which created an impression which he did not intend. We understand that the wine farmers in the first instance require more protection than what is given by the import duty. I think that it will not be fair to the wine farmers if we do not express our disappointment at the Minister’s statement last Wednesday. It is not necessary for me to go into details. But where there is such a large portion of the population who make an honourable living from this industry, where there is a surplus, and where development is constantly still taking place in that industry, we feel that there must be a weak spot somewhere when we find that year after year we import drink which exceeds the value of our manufactured produce. The statement of the Minister made the impression that the standard of the local product is of such a kind that our product will not be used if the foreign article is kept out because the foreign article is so much better. I do not know whether that was the intention. Where there is an attempt being made in this country by maturing and improving the production to have the local article used in preference to the foreign article then the Government should assist to make the local product of such a quality that it will be drunk. Measures must be taken to so improve the local article that it will no longer be of inferior quality. We do not for a moment admit that that is the case and therefore we took up the position that the producers in the Union have a right to more protection. I hope that the Minister will fulfil his promise and that the matter will be investigated before the next tariff is fixed.

†*Mr. ROUX:

I want to associate myself with what has been said here by the hon. member for Hopetown (Dr. Stals). A farmers’ congress was held at Malmesbury last week—not only made up of grain farmers—but all kinds of farmers. It was fairly representative and the Secretary for Agriculture was also present. He gave the farmers there good advice as usual and the conference then passed a resolution in favour of the increase of the import duty on spirituous liquors. With a view to the attitude we took up in the past it will be a great disappointment if the import duty on spirits is not increased.

*Mr. J. P. LOUW:

I also wish to say a word in favour of the increase. I think that a further 9s. per gallon on whisky would be a very good thing.

*The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I just wish to say that I informed the House that this matter had been considered by the board of trade and industries but not so thoroughly as such matters are usually considered, for there has not yet been opportunity, and the board did not feel justified in suggesting a larger measure of protection. I also said that the board would enquire into the matter again to see what could be done. I did not for a moment say that the local article was inferior. What I asked was, whether the man who is accustomed to whisky will drink our brandy if whisky is prohibited. It is a question of palate. I cannot say because I neither drink one nor the other. I just wish to point out for information that at the moment I get £420,000 from this source of taxation. If I stop importation I shall lose that revenue but we do not wish to go into the matter now, similarly with regard to the matter of bread mentioned by the hon. member for Lydenburg the board of trade and industries must also go carefully into the matter and report.

†Mr. HEATLIE:

I was pleased to hear the Minister’s reply, because it is not a thing; that should be rushed into rashly or blindly; it is a matter that has to be considered from all sides. Naturally, as representing wine farmers, one would like to see the import duty on foreign spirits as high as possible. Some little time ago, when the wine farmers asked for a prohibitive duty; but I should say that if the Minister was to take a step of that kind it might do the industry more harm than good. It is pretty certain that it would have a harmful effect. It is natural that the wine farmers should ask for a higher duty; but the Minister has to consider the matter from all sides, and I hope he will make a study of the whole subject before he puts on a higher duty. Imported spirits may be able to pay a moderate increase of duty to the extent of 9s. or 12s. and give him more revenue. For these reasons. I am very pleased to hear the Minister say he will have to go into the matter very thoroughly, to see whether it might not do the wine industry more harm than good.

Class II put and agreed to.

Class III put and agreed to.

On Class IV.

†Mr. JAGGER:

I wish to move a reduction on Item 61, blankets, rugs, etc., (a) weighing more than 12 ozs., containing 50 per cent. or more of cotton. That duty has been raised from 25 per cent., less 3 per cent. rebate on the British article, to 1s. per lb. I also wish to draw attention to Item 61 (c) blanketing and kaffir sheeting on which the duty was 15 per cent., and has now been raised to 1s. per lb. This is a tremendous increase in taxation. Of course, these are the articles made entirely of cotton and used for the most part by the natives of this country. There are two classes, the white cotton blanket or sheeting which comes from Manchester, and there is the cheap cotton blanket which is coloured and is made of waste cotton, and generally comes from Belgium and Holland. To give the House some idea of how the duty has gone up, I have before me an example of a shipment of cotton blankets where the duty is given on the shipments. The old duty on an article costing 1s., 25 per cent., was 3d., the new duty is 1s., an increase of 300 per cent. Then we have an article costing 3s. 9d. (3 lbs.); the old duty was 11½d., the new duty 30d., which is an increase of 175 per cent. Then we have kadungas costing 1s. 6d. each, in that case the old duty was 12 per cent., equal to 2.16d. each. The present increase is up to 20 per cent. equal to 66⅔ per cent. increase in duty. On cotton blankets, coloured, or rather better quality (2 lbs.) the old duty was 25 per cent. and the new duty 103 per cent. The cost of a whole shipment free on board, of which I have particulars before me, is £849 5s. 11d. The old duty on that shipment would have been £212; the new duty is £768. You may say, quite truthfully, that the average duty on these blankets is now 100 per cent. Here are articles worn by the poorest people in the country. The Prime Minister has charge of the interests of the natives. I venture to think he has not been consulted in this matter.

Gen. SMUTS:

Poor white people use these blankets too.

†Mr. JAGGER:

Thousands of natives will not be able to afford to buy these blankets and, consequently, will have to use sacking for their wives and children, and to some extent for themselves. Then this increase of taxation comes on the top of other increases so far as the natives in the Cape Province are concerned. We have just agreed to levy a poll tax of £1 on every male native. In hundreds of cases that pound will take some earning. With the native the blanket is, perhaps, one of the most important articles of clothing. This will be an oppressive tax on the natives. The Minister thinks that the distributors of these blankets obtain large profits —something like 100 per cent.—but that idea is absolutely and entirely incorrect. I have had telegrams from the Eastern Province bearing out my statement on this point. The cotton blanket is a standard line, and a kaffir, when he enters a store, first asks the price of blankets and judges the other articles in the store by the price asked for the blanket. Consequently, storekeepers cut the prices of cotton blankets to the bone.

An HON. MEMBER:

What profit is obtained?

†Mr. JAGGER:

25 per cent. on the cost. No retailer can afford to do business at less than 20 per cent. on returns, or 25 per cent. on the cost. I will admit that high prices had to be charged during the war, but that applied to all articles. You cannot make these blankets at anything, like the price in this country. The coloured blanket is cotton-waste from the spinneries, it is the cheapest article made. The ordinary price of cotton to-day is 1s. or 13d. per lb. They are paying about 1s. in Manchester, so there is not much profit. You cannot say this is a protective duty, because it is not and I can only assume the Minister has put it on for revenue purposes.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

No, that is not so.

†Mr. JAGGER:

Then it is downright folly to put on a duty for protective purposes on these Even supposing it is for revenue, he will not get anything like the same amount as before, because the Minister will never understand that most people have a restricted income. If you double the price of the article they will buy less, because no one will give them increased wages just for the purpose of buying blankets. I think it really is a grave injustice. I have also here letters from the Transkei which point out that friction has already arisen from the administration of the Bill. The manufacturers usually make them a few ounces over weight, and at the Customs House they are found to be a trifle over 12 ozs. and they, grasping as much as they can get, charge the extra duty on the overweight, and the consequence is no man knows where he is. There is a standard price for the article, and he finds so has to pay more duty than he expected, and, for that reason it has led to a lot of friction at the customs, particularly at East, London. I press on the Minister to drop this. I do not plead for blankets containing more than 50 per cent. of cotton, because they can afford to pay. I move that this shilling be deleted entirely, and we go back to the 25 per cent., and the same thing in “C” (kaffir blanketing and sheeting).

Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 8.5 p.m.

†Mr. JAGGER:

I now bring up my amendment, which is—

In Item 61, sub-item (a) (i), to omit the proposed alternative duty and to substitute “ad valorem | 25% | 25% and in sub-item (c). to omit the proposed alternative duty and to substitute “ad valorem | 15% | 15%”. †Brig.-Gen. BYRON:

I hope that the Minister will very carefully consider this amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger). It seems to me that this tax is against all principles of taxation to begin with. First of all, it is taxing that class of the community that can least afford if, and, secondly, it is a tax on the bare necessaries of life. For those two reasons alone, it is obvious that the imposition of a tax like this should be very carefully considered and, if imposed at all, it should be as light as possible. It is not clear to me, at all events, what is the object of this taxation. I believe the Minister has disclaimed any idea of getting any additional revenue from it. If he has that idea even remotely at the back of his mind, I think he is mistaken. At all events, the Durban Chamber of Commerce, which has members dealing very largely in these particular articles, reports that—

If the new rates are maintained, the Government will lose much of the revenue they now collect on these goods, which are only used by natives and the poorer classes.

So far from swelling his revenue, these new taxes will tend to diminish it. I think it has been disclosed by the previous speaker that as a protective measure these taxes are worse than useless. It is obvious that these particular articles are not made in this country, and there is no likelihood of their being made, as far as we can see, for a generation or two; and so from a protective point of view these proposals are useless, and are exceedingly irritating and oppressive to a certain class of the community. As regards the incidence of this taxation, I have also examples furnished by a Durban merchant. He says—

We have second-hand army blankets which we were selling last year at 4s. 6d. and 5s. each. The new duty is 5s. per blanket;

and so the cost of these very necessary articles is more than doubled at once by the imposition of these duties.

Another item is second-hand hats, the cost thereof being 6d. each. There are no inside leathers or outside bands. After putting on leathers and bands we were selling these hats at 18s. a dozen. The new duty is 3s. 6d. on each hat.

That is bringing protection and taxation to the height of absurdity.

An HON. MEMBER:

What kind of people wear these hats?

†Brig.-Gen. BYRON:

I think a great many are worn by the poorer European population. I do not think natives are very large purchasers of second-hand hats, but at all events we are putting a tax on a very poor class of people who are ill able to pay it. There is another very important aspect, which I think the Minister knows about. There are very strong medical reports about the condition of the natives in the eastern portion of the Cape Province. Owing to various circumstances these natives have not been able to buy blankets and rugs, even with the present duty. They have, owing to poverty, been compelled to dress in sacks or skins. The native, naturally, is a very clean person, and we know that he washes not only himself but he keeps his hut clean and he was ones his garments when he can afford soap. But when they have to wear skins it is not possible for them to keep clean, and the natural result has followed; there has been an epidemic of typhus due to the inability of these natives to clothe themselves in washable garments. Typhus is a louse-borne disease—is no discriminator of persons, and we may have to pay for this by an outbreak among Europeans to whom it can be communicated. That alone ought to be a very strong reason for making the tariff on these particular articles as low as possible. We find in 1924 cotton blankets and rugs were imported to the value of £828,000. I think it will be accepted that the vast bulk of these are for native sale and native wear, so that already we are deriving a considerable revenue from them. Shawls also are almost exclusively worn by natives; these were imported to the tune of £105,000. We find that on light cotton blankets there is an increase of duty of 312 per cent., and on blankets weighing 3 lbs. 8 ozs. the increase amounts to 197½ per cent. These are pressing burdens on a part of the population with very little power to resist the imposition of these taxes, and even less power to pay them. Is it any wonder that a great many members have had most strong appeals, not only from European quarters, but from the natives themselves and from native organizations in regard to the imposition of these duties? I have a letter from a native organization in which they say this additional taxation is “bleeding and agonizing them.” That is how they feel it; that is how it appears to them. I think there has been a very strong case made out for very serious reconsideration of this tariff. I hope the Minister will see the reasonableness of it, and be able to meet the amendment just made by the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger). We are going on very wrong, and, I think, improper lines. I think it ought to be emphasized that it is against the principles of taxation to tax the bare necessities of life, and especially to tax those least able to pay the taxes. We always thought—it has been laid down by all authorities and has been the general practice—that the incidence of taxation ought to lie chiefly on those who can best afford to pay. Surely no sensible hon. member will argue seriously that increasing the taxation to the natives by as much as 312 per cent. in one case, is laying the burden on those best able to bear it’ On the contrary, it is laying it on those who will find it very burdensome. Their necessities of life are being taxed; their clothing is being affected, and this may have serious consequences, not only for the natives, but for Europeans.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Perhaps I should say a few words in reply to what has been urged by the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) and the hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.-Gen. Byron). I think the effect of this increased duty is greatly exaggerated. There is no doubt about it that traders from all over the country have set on foot an agitation against this increased duty, but as I shall later on point out, I think this agitation is not altogether disinterested.

Brig.-Gen. BYRON:

Of course not; everyone is interested.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The hon. member for East London (North) (Brig.-Gen. Byron) has, for instance, mentioned the case of the second-hand blankets on which there is a duty of 5s. each. Let me say at once that the duty is frankly prohibitive. Rhodesia prohibits the importation of these blankets altogether, by statute, not by a tariff. Of these second-hand articles coming into the country many of them are insanitary and are not in the public interest.

Brig.-Gen. BYRON:

Why don’t you prohibit them then?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Well, other countries have done so and we might have to consider it if we do not keep them out this way. When we come to the cotton blanket, members try and make out a strong case by pointing out the great percentage increase. As I pointed out this afternoon, when you want to protect your industries, and when you have to do with a low-priced article, you cannot deal with it by means of an ad valorem rate. You must have a specific duty. What is this terrible increase in duty on the cotton blanket? The minimum is 1s. per lb. and the maximum increased duty is 2s. 6d., that is for a 2½ lb. blanket. The increase only takes place as far as the low-priced articles are concerned. After that the duty is the ordinary ad volorem duty which applied formerly. We have heard a lot about the poor native child. Do not forget that the blanket of the child—under 12 ounces—is exempt altogether from increased duty.

Mr. JAGGER:

I never mentioned the child.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Hon. members here have not; but I have heard about it ad nauseam during the last few weeks. This agitation is not altogether disinterested. If people who are so solicitous for the welfare of the natives would have a little consideration, they would realize that the native need not pay a penny increase. I have made enquiries about the landed cost of these articles, and the prices at which they are sold to the native. I met a deputation of gentlemen interested, who represented their case to me, and asked me to consider the matter, and I have done so; but I have also made enquiries, as I have stated. I asked these traders what profit they would be satisfied with, and I was informed that the wholesaler was content with a modest 10 per cent. and the retailer 33½ per cent. I got information to enable me to see how this would work out. I got the information from magistrates and excise officers of the country and it is to this effect: that, as far as the cotton blanket of British origin is concerned, the f.o.b. price of the 16 ounce blanket is 1s. 6d.; whereas that of the blanket of Belgian origin is 1s. 0½d. Therefore, if you want to protect your industry you cannot deal with it by means of an ad valorem rate. What do you think these articles are sold at to the native buyer? Both are sold at 3s. a pound, that is the British blanket costing 1s. 6d. and the Belgian one costing 1s. 0½d. are born sold at 3s. per lb. The landed cost of the Belgian blanket is 1s. 5d. and the retailer adds at least 50 per cent. on the cost to him; so that the retailer who is supposed to be content with a modest 10 per cent. is enabled to get 40 per cent. and the other 50 per cent.

Mr. JAGGER:

That is entirely inaccurate.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

My information is perhaps as reliable as the hon. member’s.

Mr. JAGGER:

I am sure it is not.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Let us take the 1 lb. English blanket, which is an article of better quality than the other. The f.o.b. price is 1s. 6d. You add to that the importing charges of 10 per cent. and you get 1½d. You add to that the present duty of 25 per cent. that is 4½d., and you get a landed cost of 2s. Take the Belgian article. The cost f.o.b. is 1s. 0½d., importing charges 1¼d., duty 25 per cent., 3¼d., which gives a landed cost of 1s. 5d. You add to that the wholesale profit 12½ per cent. and you get .3 that is three pence in the case of the English article, and in the case of the Belgian article you can add 40 per cent., and get 7d. After adding 331 per cent. retail profit you get 9d., and by adding 50 per cent, in the case of the Belgian, article you get 1s. and you get the price to the consumer of 3s. in each case. If the landed cost of these articles were taken and the blanket sold to the native at the profit which the deputation said they were satisfied with, the price to the consumer, with the increased duty, would be 3s. 3d. only, that is an increase of 3d. on the 1 lb blanket. Let us take me 3 lb. Belgian blanket. It costs 37.7 pence f.o.b.; and add 10 per cent. for importing charges, 25 per cent. duty and you get a landed cost of 50,9 pence. Now I want to give the prices which have been given me, from reliable quarters, at which these articles are sold. In Umtata this 3 lb. Belgian blanket costing nearly 4s. 3d. (50.9 pence) is sold at 9s.; at Herschel at 10s.: in the Queenstown district for 9s.; in Butterworth at 8s. 3d., and in Kingwilliamstown at 8s. You will see that, although in the case of the very low-priced article you may make out a case for 50, 100 or 300 per cent. duty, that, after all, it amounts to nothing. I say again, if you want to protect your industry, and that is the purpose for which this increased duty was designed, you must do it by way of a specific duty. And we want to try and establish in this country factories which will supply a woollen article to our customers. This is a wool producing country. We have some splendid woollen mills and we should encourage the native and others to use the products of this country instead of the shoddiest of shoddy stuff from overseas. If you saw the material from which these continental blankets, particularly, are made, even with this increased duty you would agree that, if you could get the native to pay a little more for a decent blanket, he would be getting better value for his money.

An HON. MEMBER:

They won’t wear them.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

If there is a trade for blankets, is there any reason why our mills should not manufacture a blanket made from wool and cotton. The board of trade would allow the necessary material to come in free, if the native will only wear a mixture of cotton and wool. This is one of the items where, by means of our tariff, we are out to protect the existing industries in this country, that they may have a chance to exist. If, as a result of that, the native, in common with the other sections of the community, has to pay a little more for his article he should not complain. We are not putting increased taxation on the natives alone. There are a number of articles purchased only by white men on which we have increased the duty. If we want to get industries established by means of tariff protection the native must bear his share of the burden as well as the white man. It is not an onerous burden. If the commercial community would be prepared to have a little less profit they will be able to sell the blanket, notwithstanding the increased duty, at the same price that they get to-day. During the war when prices were high, the native wages were the same as they are now. In Johannesburg, during the war, 2 lb. Belgian cotton blankets which cost 2s. f.o.b. were sold to the natives at 8s. 6d. I think this whole agitation against this so-called increased duty is very much exaggerated.

†Mr. ALEXANDER:

I was very glad to hear what the Minister said about the secondhand blankets, for I hope to remind him of his words later on, when we discuss secondhand films. I am entirely a supporter of a protectionist policy, but I would like a little more information whether there are cotton blanket factories in the Union—(Cries of “No”). I believe you could have such factories established, but it would take some time and a tremendous amount of machinery would have to be imported. The protection should be imposed when steps are taken to have the article manufactured here and not before. Seeing that cotton blankets are not at present manufactured here, but would be made here as soon as it was known that they are being protected, the increased duty should be placed in the suspended list; in other words, the Government should be given the right to impose the extra duty as soon as the cotton blankets are made here. Our woollen blanket manufacture is one of the best industries in the country, and one factory I know, uses only South African wool and raw material. Whether they will ever be able to compete with the cotton blanket in price I do not know, but I do not why the cotton manufactures industry should not become a big one in South Africa. Right through the Continent of Africa cotton goods are being imported on a tremendous scale for the natives, and if we could establish such a cotton industry here, we should have the finest home market. I move as an amendment—

In item 61, sub-item (a) (i) and (ii) and sub-item (c), to omit the proposed duties and to substitute in each instance:—

ad valorem plus a

25% suspended 15%

25% days of 15%

†The MINISTER OF POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS:

I would like to read portions of a letter which I received on my return to Cape Town the other day. It has a practical bearing on the subject we are now discussing—the duty on cotton blankets. The letter is from a business firm in Durban who write—

I thought I would write you on an interesting subject which will, I am sure, be of interest to you as well as to your fellow Ministers.
Since the proposed 1s. per lb. duty on cotton blankets, I cabled my brother in London to get an estimate for a plant to manufacture cotton blankets in Durban. I have received his reply that some firms in London and abroad are drawing out estimates for a cotton mill for our requirements. I can assure you that should we not have sufficient capital, we know so many people in the textile business in Yorkshire and Lancashire who would invest money along with us to start off this industry.

Since this they have cabled information giving the detailed estimates of what the factory would cost, and I am informed they are going ahead raising the money for the purpose of setting up a cotton factory in Durban to manufacture blankets, and that is only possible through this tariff—

I know there are some protests being made against this duty of 1s. per lb. on cotton blankets, but from an employment point of view I say this 1s. per lb. duty is essential in many ways. South Africa is one of the very few places where cotton blankets are made out of cotton waste, and not pure cotton, hence the reason that blankets can be imported here at the rate of 1s. per lb. f.o.b. What chance has the local manufacturer against that. None whatever.
Since the Government has removed the duty on shirting for the purpose of protecting the local manufacturers I have started a shirt factory in Durban. I can assure you that nothing gives me greater pleasure than to see at 5 o’clock the hundred and fifty people leaving my warehouse, and I know it pleases you as well. I should like to see a pioneer cotton mill in Durban established if the Government will stick to this 1s. per lb. duty on cotton blankets. Mr. MADELEY:

What are the conditions of the workers?

†The MINISTER OF POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS:

They will be governed by the Wages Board. The fact remains they are busy making shirts and they are hoping to start a cotton factory. I mention this to show the effect in South Africa of the Government’s proposals.

†Mr. JAGGER:

You don’t produce cotton cheap enough in South Africa, and you cannot get cotton waste at all, and the Minister says they are made from cotton waste. The Minister says the outcry is exaggerated and due to self-interest, but only to this extent, that it is going to interfere with a large business done in East London, and surely you cannot be exaggerating when the duties are going to be increased as much as 300 per cent. Surely it is time to raise a protest when the duties are increased in that fashion. There is any amount of justification for the agitation and for the remonstrances which have been addressed to the Minister. The Minister read out certain figures relating to the profits of the distributors of these goods, and I have telegrams and letters from the Transkei. Here is one from the East London Chamber of Commerce—

Following further telegrams received re selling prices cotton blankets. Cotton blankets costing 2s. 5½d., plus all charges sold in territories at 3s. and less per lb.

Second begins—

Average profit 20 per cent. on indent. From traveller, Mqanduli—

Ten ounces generally sold 1s. 9d. to 2s. each stop. Won’t stock at present price 2s. is limit.

From traveller, Engcobo—

Ten ounce blankets old price sold 2s. No positive information yet regarding new prices; traders still selling old prices here.
An important trader, Mr. H. A. Wood, of Munyu, Idutywa, informs us personally this morning that the highest price ever charged on cotton blankets on old basis was 3s. per lb. and more frequently 2s. 9d. per lb. Is still selling at these figures.

Another from Quthing—

Average profit on cotton blankets 10 ounces to 2 pounds is 27.2 on cost, or 21.4 on turnover.

Another from Viedge Bros., very large dealers in the Transkei—

Average margin profit on cotton blankets added to landed cost by traders before duties increased was 20 per cent.

Another from Mr. Pearson, Griqualand East—

My average profit added to landed cost cotton blankets 25 per cent. on selling, but frequently sold at much less.

Another from Kentani—

Cotton blankets sold here 2s. 9d. to 3s. per lb. for cash.

The talk about 50 per cent. for the wholesaler or retailer is inaccurate. I am sure about it, and surely I ought to know something about business. The Minister has been entirely misinformed.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The magistrate—

†Mr. JAGGER:

What do I care about the magistrates, they don’t know anything about blankets. My hon. friends do not want cotton mills started. They want the natives to buy woollen blankets. The natives would buy them if they could afford to. Like other people, the native buys the best he can afford, some times a little better. The Minister will not get into his head the one point that the wages of the natives are limited. They simply buy cotton blankets because they cannot afford to buy woollen ones, and the consequence will be, under this new tariff, that they will be unable to buy anything at all, or, instead of two or three, they will only buy one. That is the position, and the Minister should understand it. He cannot force the consumption of woollen blankets, such as those made in the neighbourhood of Cape Town, and such as those proposed to be made at Harrismith. I am very sorry my hon. friend does not see his way to agree to this. This taxation is going to add to the unrest amongst the natives. It appears to me the Government have set out to irritate the natives as much as possible. They make the blankets more expensive and, under the colour bar Bill, they forbid them going into certain trades. Here you do your best, and I say it quite deliberately, to increase the cost of living to these people, because clothing is part of the cost of living.

Mr. WATERSTON:

Interjected a remark.

†Mr. JAGGER:

There is just one class of people in South Africa that exploit the natives for all they are worth, and that is the working men. Take the men on the goldfields. Would the mines be able to pay the wages they pay to the white men on the goldfields if you had not such a low wage paid to the natives? The white men there are paid the highest wages in the world, except America, and you could not make the mines pay unless you had the cheap labour of the natives. It is the working man every time in this country who exploits the natives. Hon. members seem to forget that, after all is said and done, an industry can only afford to pay a certain amount of wage. If you force it to pay more than it can afford, it closes down because it becomes insolvent. The working men of this country. I say quite deliberately, exploit the native more than any class of men do.

†Mr. ALLEN:

As a Labour representative in this House, I rejoice at one thing in the reply made by the Minister just now, and that is his authoritative statement that industries are built up and fostered, not by those possessors of shy capital, as we have hitherto been led to believe, but by the very poorest sections of the population. The Minister has made an official declaration in this House that to propagate a new industry in this country it us necessary that the lowest wage-earning class shall be taxed very substantially in order to provide a safe field for a new flood of capital coming into this country. We have always been told that a sympathetic Government and a very daring speculative investor will combine together to establish industries in a new country like this. As a Labour man, I rejoice very much at the very plain statement made by the Minister. His declaration would be reassuring if we had any attempt made at the present time to establish a cotton manufacturing industry in this country, but cotton manufacturing is an industry which covers a much wider field than has been adumbrated by the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs. It is all very well for someone to write and say that they are ordering machinery from overseas for a cotton industry, but your cotton industry begins at the bottom, when you are handling the raw product, and it works up through various stages until you get to the weaving industry, so that it is going to be a long time before a cotton manufacturing industry of any magnitude is going to be established in this country, and I think it is wrong that the whole vicious circle should be perpetuated once again, because we have always had it demonstrated that wages are ever the last thing to follow a rise in the cost of living, and, when that cost of living becomes intolerable, wages are attacked as a first step to bring down the cost of living. Here we have the beginning of a similar vicious circle. When I mentioned this matter recently, I got what I hoped was an implied promise from the Minister. Evidently he has gone into it again, but I must say my hopes have been dashed. The trade in this class of commodity is a considerable one. It seems that it amounted in 1924 to £797.000. There again we can see that this trade is dealing with a purely limited demand (that of the native buyer) which does not amount to anything like the demand that would be created if we were actually manufacturing our own products here. But it is a trade that is continually increasing. It has increased to the extent of 52½ per cent. during the three years—1921-1924—so that it is very evident that there is a promising field for that particular industry but I submit that it is neither just nor equitable to place the onus for creating conditions favourable to the establishment of that industry on the class of people who are least fitted to stand the expenditure. It is not only a matter of compelling them to pay more, but, it is actually a matter of compelling these people to do without these commodities, which they are rightly, I think, entitled to by reason of their industry. I hone it is not too late for the Minister to reconsider his position, but I am afraid it is. I notice that Belgium is the chief competing country, and it is very rapidly gobbling up this trade, having in three years increased its trade by 79.7 per cent. against Britain’s 46.4 per cent. I think the Minister might do something on more scientific lines to counteract that kind of thing, and protect articles which are produced in a country which manufactures under more decent conditions, and if a cotton industry is established in this country, I think a much better way of fixing a balance as between the imported article and the locally made article, would be to bond the article when produced, and as it is released for sale, subsidize it by a bounty.

†Mr. PAYN:

I would like to point out to the Minister that a few days ago he brought in other taxation which is directed entirely against the native, and that we, on this side of the House, the majority of us, supported him in that taxation.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

What is that?

†Mr. PAYN:

The poll tax and the local tax.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

Taxation in their own interests.

†Mr. PAYN:

Not entirely.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The Treasury does not get a penny from it.

†Mr. PAYN:

We, at any rate, although it is hitting the natives in the Cape Province very largely, accepted that taxation and supported it, although no doubt many of our constituents, when we go back, will have something to say to us in that matter. Here we have to-night an entirely different proposition. I hope the Minister will recognize that in protesting against the proposals now before us we are not entirely-looking to the native vote. I agree with the contention of the hon. member who has just spoken (Mr. Allen). I believe that the industries in this country must realize that they can only be built up upon the consumption of the large masses of the population, and we must realize that these industries must produce articles which are consumed to a considerable extent by the native. I sympathize largely with the attitude of the Minister in this particular case. I think if we can establish a cotton blanket industry in this country it would be a good thing for the country. But does the Minister realize that this taxation is going to hit only the native population? Does he realize that the measures which have been brought before this House recently are going to prevent the natives from working in those factories which are to produce these very articles that are to be consumed by the natives? Therefore, the natives will have a complaint at once. They will say that the white man is building up a trade on their backs. I do not think that at the present stage, seeing we are introducing this new legislation, it is advisable to do this sort of thing.. The second aspect I would like to put before the Minister is this, that the natives have passed through a very bad time in the last few years. The Minister has quoted the prices they paid during the war, but we all know that money then was very free. The native in those days was getting 2s. 6d. a pound for wool and for stock he was getting £10 or £15 for an ox or a cow. To-day he getting £2 or £3. The whole value of everything has dropped. To place extra taxation upon them to-day would give them every right to say we are not treating them fairly. I listened very interestedly to the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) who is one of the big business men of this country, and I was astonished to find that he had such an intimate knowledge of native trading conditions in the Transkei; and I would like the Minister to go through the income tax returns of these traders and see if there is such a huge profit from the sale of these blankets and native truck as he seems to think. The hon. member for Cape Town (Central) is absolutely right when he says that cotton blankets are sold at a bare profit. In every trade certain articles are sold at a narrow margin in order to attract trade, and cotton blankets are one of them. Where the Minister got his information from I do not know, but I am confident that the cotton blanket shows a very narrow margin of profit. I appeal to the Minister again on these grounds. Does he not realize there is no such thing as a cotton blanket factory established in this country? Surely we are not going to adopt the policy of putting a heavy tax on certain articles in the hone that some stray capitalist may come along and say—

Oh. I see there is a heavy tax on this; I will start a factory.

I do think the argument of the hon. member for Hanover Street (Mr. Alexander) is a perfectly fair one. Give the capitalists of this country, if they are prepared to start factories, an undertaking that if they can produce these articles at a reasonable price and quantity that this country will be prepared to protect those articles. The Minister must face this too. I do not know whether he wanted to drive cotton blankets out of the country and persuade the natives to wear woollen blankets or whether he wishes a cotton blanket factory to be started. He was not quite clear on this point. The average native is earning a very small wage, and a woollen blanket is an expensive article, while a cotton blanket is one of those things that are handed down, from child to child, exactly as we, in our young days, had to take the cast-off clothing of our elder brothers. The cotton blanket comes down until the poor little infant wears it in tatters. The natives are in this position to-day that they have not been taught to wear these better-class garments, and if you are going to drive cotton blankets out of the country what is the good of trying to start a factory? I have here a letter from a very important trader. He says—

If the present proposed tariff is imposed, cotton blankets are doomed, and a very serious loss of revenue must occur which we men of commerce will be called upon to make up in some other form of taxation.

There is no doubt about it. If you induce them to give up their cotton blankets what are they going to wear? Do not force them to give them up at the present time. Have a suspended tariff or some other means, but do not tax the natives in this way at the present time.

†Mr. PEARCE:

I am sorry to have to differ from the hon. member for Springs (Mr. Allen) I believe that we should support our industries by taxing the commodities entering this country. I do not believe the present system is perfect. I would rather see a tax on commodities, not for revenue, but for safeguarding the interests of the people of this country by levelling up the difference of the cost of production in other countries with the cost of production in this country. The time is not ripe for anything of that description, therefore a policy whereby the Minister puts a tax on other countries’ products, not only for revenue producing purposes but to encourage the industries of this country, should be supported by every fair member of this House. The idea in the past was that Australia would never be able to manufacture its own clothing, but from the statistics it is shown that the clothing used by the Police, the Defence Force and all the civil servants who wear uniform was made from cloth manufactured in Australia. They are able to do it, we shall be able to do it eventually. Besides that, we have a duty to perform; it is to find work for the people of South Africa; that is our first duty. As long as we have unemployed in this country we should endeavour to make that our first aim. I would rather have the clothes dear and the workers working than have the clothes cheap and have the workers without work and no money.

An HON. MEMBER:

Are there no unemployed in Australia?

†Mr. PEARCE:

The hon. member knows perfectly well that he is not looking at the timing in an honest manner. He knows that Australia is absorbing 8,000 emigrants every month and naturally there must be unemployment there, but in this country we are getting very few emigrants, therefore we have a right to find work for all the people of South Africa. If we analyse other countries we find that those countries which have a fiscal policy based upon the principle of looking after their own people first they have had a surplus although the condition of the workers and of citizens in that country may not have been perfect. Still the fact remains that they are in a better condition than those countries which have neglected their first duty, that charity begins at home.

†Mr. NICHOLLS:

As a protectionist who wants to see the establishment of industries in this country, I think we ought not to take only one road. We seem to think that the only way to protect industry is by way of a tariff. I noticed in this evening’s paper that the Prime Minister of England, who is a strong protectionist, thinks that the industries of England could be expanded by bounties. The cotton industry, or the iron industry, if they are going to be extended, must be protected by some other measure than a tariff because their principal markets must be outside the Union. The cotton industry is one which we should aim at establishing in this country; because, as pointed out by the hon. member for Hanover Street (Mr. Alexander), we have the whole of Africa as our market. Belgium is producing the cheapest cotton blanket in the world, and if we are going to sell cotton blankets in the Belgian Congo, we will have to compete with Belgium. We cannot compete in outside markets by means of a tariff. The protection of the cotton industry will have to be by means of a bounty, such as we have already attempted in the iron industry. My own impression is that in the latter case the bounty was not high enough to attract capital. In the case of the cotton industry under discussion, I think it is unjust to endeavour to establish that industry at the expense of the poorest portion of the population. The protection should be borne by the whole community. I feel that there are ways we must explore for the establishment of industries, in connection with which we have to look for a market overseas, other than by means of a tariff.

Brig.-Gen. ARNOTT:

It is a well-known fact that there are only two countries in the world able to produce cotton blankets, namely, England and Belgium. Northern France produces the same kind of article as Belgium, but not such a good one. In that highly industrialized country, the United States, they tried to produce cotton blankets against England, but failed. There is something that the old country knows better than the rest of the world. Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Japan have all tried and failed. Cotton blankets, before the war, were sold in Manchester at just about the price of the raw cotton—only about a ½d. difference—and if you can produce them at that, good enough, but if not to all those hon. members who shouted, hear, hear, when the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs was reading out that letter, who are thinking of putting money into that cotton mill in Durban, my advice would be “don’t.” You will lose it quickly. If we were to start a cotton industry, it should be to produce the coarse cotton cloth worn by the natives in the interior. It is a cheap cloth, easily woven, and does not require skilled machinery such as the fine cloths do. It is no good going in for waste material, such as the cotton blankets are made of. I must agree with the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), that the Minister of Finance has been far led away by the figures he has got. I have not been in the kaffir truck trade since 1912, but before that I retailed one and a quarter pound cotton blankets and sold thousands of them at 1s. 6d. and there was no 33 l/3rd percentage there. It is all humbug to say that you are going to build up an industry of that kind. You are merely chasing a shadow.

†Mr. HAY:

Before passing on to the schedule, I would like to ask the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) to read this morning’s “Cape Times” where he will see that, according to the latest information, the United States of America had a surplus of revenue for the last financial year of £50,000,000 sterling—not dollars—and has no unemployment. Of course, that is a protected country, and if that is not convincing then there is no answering the hon. member for Cape Town (Central). All this about the poor native is very nice so far as it goes, but the native is already being initiated into the higher price. My information is that the trading class is not prepared to sell the stocks which they have under higher tariff prices; so that the native is being accustomed to this increase, and the trade is looking after himself. In many trades there are cut lines, sold below cost, perhaps, for trading purposes, and if a trader chooses to do that it is his business; but there is another aspect of the question. From the earliest times in which I have been associated with the native, I have always advocated the placing of special duties on the things he uses. Let him contribute his fair share to the revenue of the country and then he will ask for a fair rate of pay, this will put him on a better plane in competition with white labour. There has always been this temptation—to let the native off cheaply—that he should not be asked to pay, on the article he consumes, anything like the same proportion as the white man. I want to impress upon the Minister the absolute necessity for increasing the tariff on second-hand goods. These are a constant danger. I had some experience in connection with the sterilization of bed clothing and wearing apparel, in connection with hospitals and municipal work, and the most astounding things occurred. After three hours in the sterilization process, the things were opened up and sent for bacteriological investigation, and on examination disease germs were found, active and ready to carry on their work. The sterilization of imported second-hand apparel is not complete at all. It is perfunctory. Exporters get a certificate that it has been through such a process, which often means that it was put in after it was baled, and at any time this country may have to spend half a million on an epidemic introduced through this second-hand stuff. Why should we take the second-hand blankets and garments of Europe? They have their poor and instead of sending such goods here it would be better if they were to use them up in the country of production. I think the duty on all second-hand clothing should be absolutely prohibitive. By the importation of such things we are jeopardizing the health of the community, injuring the tailoring trade, and doing no good to anyone. I hope it is not too late to place a prohibitive duty on second-hand clothing and second-hand blankets; the importation of the latter being particularly atrocious.

Mr. JAGGER:

Will the Minister accept the compromise proposed by the hon. member for Cape Town (Hanover Street) (Mr. Alexander)? If so, I will withdraw my amendment in favour of it.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

No, I regret I cannot accept it. It would throw out the whole of the scheme.

†Mr. MADELEY:

I can tell the Minister quite plainly that he is putting us in a very difficult position. The amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town (Hanover Street) (Mr. Alexander) appeals very much indeed to me. An enormously increased duty is not going to stop the importation of these blankets for one moment, but it will increase the cost to the native very considerably, owing to the number of hands these blankets have to pass through before they reach the ultimate purchaser. It appears to me that the price to the natives will be tremendous. It may be argued that it is just as well to tax the native heavily in order that he may demand higher wages, but the process of obtaining bigger pay is a very dangerous and painful one, and I do not think it is quite practical politics. It is an illuminating thing that to-day we, a Parliament in the British Commonwealth of Nations, should calmly be considering the establishment of an industry designed to make cotton blankets, and that in one of the large wool producing countries of the world. Blankets should be manufactured from wool and not from cotton, which is a very unsatisfactory substitute. It is contemplated that a native is going to have a bed covering weighing about 12 ozs. What is the average price of wool—is 15d. a low price per lb? It does not require much calculation to realize that a wool blanket would not cost very much for material if it weighed only 1 lb. or 1 lb. 4 ozs. We should turn our attention to advocating the manufacture of woollen blankets for natives. The Minister will be well advised to accept the suggested compromise, and not to stand to his guns.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I regret I cannot accept the amendments. The hon. member has spoken about the establishment of the cotton industry here. Ostensibly these duties were designed, not to protect the cotton industry, but to protect the woollen industry. I have said the natives might as well buy and wear woollen blankets. I cannot accept these amendments. The Government and the Board of Trade have carefully considered these things, and to accept amendments like these would throw out the whole scheme of the Budget.

†Mr. WATERSTON:

Hon. members will agree with me that those who know the conditions under which the natives live, also know that many of the natives would prefer a cotton blanket to a woollen blanket. He does not want woollen blankets. The hon. member for Benoni (Mr. Madeley) smiles. I have been in the Transkei at all hours of the night, because that is one of the duties of the mounted police. We had to go through the huts at all hours of the night. For the native to be without woollen blankets is not a hardship, because he would sooner have a cotton blanket. They decorate them with buttons and dye them with red ochre, in fact they use them for clothing. We must face the position that either South Africa wants industries or it does not, and if we want them let us do what we can to establish industries, otherwise in a few years, when the mining industry perishes, South Africa will go to pieces, because we have nothing to take the place of the mining industry. Australia has done well, because while the gold mines were being worked they built up other industries to take the place of the gold mines. To-day we are in the parlous position that we can do nothing in connection with the mining industry in case we upset the whole country. We can understand the point of view of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger), because he is an importer and believes in buying in the cheapest market and selling in the dearest. He even believes in importing his labour from overseas. I have seen a letter from a branch of his firm in Johannesburg where they sacked a South African because they had imported a man from overseas. But he is quite consistent in his ideas as an importer. Many of the hon. members are against protection, but they are in favour of bounties. Who is going to pay them? Unless we have a bounty system side by side with the system of tariffs, we may find that we are taxing the poorest of the community in South Africa to provide bounties, while leaving the door open to importation of products by sweated labour in other countries, because the burden of taxation always falls on a working man. The hon. member for Zululand (Mr. Nicholls), when he said the Prime. Minister of England was in favour of protection but was also in favour of bounties, knew that the Prime Minister of England could not carry a tariff proposal through the Commons, or at any rate he would not have the community behind him. Let us not run away with the idea that the solution is the paying of bounties to industry. I hope hon. members will be prepared to face the position. We have a Board of Trade and they have had many compliments. Give them a trial. Whenever proposals are brought here in connection with tariffs there will always be members willing to point out the weak spots. Let us make up our minds that we are going to build up South African industries, produce the raw material in South Africa, have all the work done by South Africans, and that we are going to build up a United States of South Africa where the citizens are going to live on a decent standard of life, and we shall be proud to belong to the country, because we shall have satisfied citizens.

The Rev. Mr. RIDER:

Natives as well as Europeans?

†Mr. WATERSTON:

Yes, natives as well as Europeans. As far as I am concerned, I say that unless you protect the white community and build up a higher status of civilization it is going to be no benefit to the native to see the white man dragged down to a lower level.

†Mr. MADELEY:

With the final statement of the hon. member for Brakpan (Mr. Waterston) I entirely agree, and also his penultimate statement, namely, that we want to see industries built up in this country. I think we all do, even so ardent a free trader as the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger). I do not pretend to have the intimate kraal knowledge of the hon. member for Brakpan. I have not been prowling about at all hours of the night to see whether the native prefers a cotton to a woollen blanket. I suppose, at all events, that the native prefers to have the better article. What I got up to do was to answer the question propounded by my hon. friend (Mr. Waterston) to the House, and that is, who is going to pay the bounty? Just the same fellow who is going to pay these duties, with this difference that he won’t have to pay so much. My hon. friend knows it quite well. I must now give the amended figures that I have worked out. My hon. friend, the member for Liesbeek (Mr. Pearce), was at one time in commercial life and no one knows better the intricacies of commercial life than he does, not even my hon. and wide-experienced friend, the member for Cape Town (Central)—

Mr. JAGGER:

No, I quite agree.

†Mr. MADELEY:

I suppose I must pay the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) the compliment of accepting the position that he has been infinitely more successful than my hon. friend (Mr. Pearce) in working those intricacies. My hon. friend assured me that I was quite wrong in my factors in arriving at a result as to the amount which the ultimate payer has to pay on the tariff or customs. He said I was wrong in taking 25 per cent. My hon. friend, the member for Cape Town (Central), said that I was wrong in taking three intermediaries and that there were only two, or rather one, between the importer and the consumer. I have endeavoured to bring the two objections together. I have taken my hon. friend with his 33⅓ per cent. as being substantially correct—and I think the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) will agree that it is so—and I have taken the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) in his number of intermediaries and we have this, that the £400.000 that the Minister estimates he is going to get from this new tariff when paid by the consumer amounts to £711,110. If that £400 000 is necessary to bolster up industry which it is supposed to be doing-, though in some cases it is not, you would only require under the bounty system a bare £400.000, with the additional advantage that the House would always have it under its review, and would know precisely where it was going and how much was going. But you have the haphazard conditions of not knowing, once you have imposed a tariff, all its ramifications. We have this position that if you impose duties amounting to £400 000. the consumer has to pay £711,110 and, taking the whole of the customs revenue at £8.000 000 in round figures, it means that an amount of £14.000 000 odd has to be paid by the consumers of this country in order to realize that £8,000 000. Is it not perfectly clear that the same people pay the amount, and that all we are divided upon is as to the method in which this amount shall be paid, and I am prepared to plump for the bounty system, because you know the amount you have to raise in revenue, you know beforehand the amount of protection that you give, and the consumer knows where he is. Under the tariff system people may not know how much they are paving in the globular amount, in the sum total, but it will be very difficult to explain to the housewife why it is that this article and that article are costing more, while the told man’s monthly cheque remains the same.

†Mr. BARLOW:

This is also one of these sections where the British preference has been dropped, and where it has been asked for at the economic conference. I am sorry it has been dropped, because if anyone needs helping at the present moment it is the Lancashire people. I am sorry for another reason, and that is that we are buying from Belgium. I would like to see these blankets from Belgium analysed to see whether they contain lead. Can you make cotton blankets at Durban? I doubt it, because they cannot be made properly anywhere in the world except Lancashire. In America they are a failure. In Australia they are a failure. Ask the hon. member for Roodepoort (the Rev. Mr. Mullineux) who is the cotton expert in this House. Let us ask him if they can make cotton blankets anywhere out of Lancashire. Is this tariff going to keep other cotton blankets out? Of course it is not. Even this high tariff will not keep the blankets made in Belgium out of this country. What it will do, will be to put the cost up to the man who cannot afford to pay, and the blankets will get worse and worse. The Minister of Posts and Telegraphs was very courageous—although, of course, we know he is a courageous man; he stroked a lion—when he told us there is going to be a cotton blanket factory at Durban. I hope I shall live to see it. Where are they going to get their cotton from? They will have to import it. To compete with Belgium you would have to produce cotton at 9d. per lb. to make anything out of it. I would like to see our farmers produce cotton at 9d. per lb. The best thing with matters like this is to let the goods come in as free as possible to the poor people. I am very sorry the Minister cannot see our way of thinking to have a suspended duty. First see if you can build this factory and produce these wonderful things; but to first put on the duty, and then wait for the factory to come from fairyland, I think is a wrong policy altogether.

†Mr. PAYN:

I would like to draw attention to item 76 on the list—piece goods not being blanketing or kaffir sheeting, which is being charged 10 per cent. to 12 per cent. Kaffir sheeting is also material that is manufactured from cotton, and it must be material containing 50 per cent. or more of cotton. The material is exactly the same as under item 61 (c), only that it is being consumed by Europeans. It is not fair that the Minister should make that differentiation, and I appeal to him to place this also on the suspended list. It seems to me the correct way to establish a new industry, and if such can be built up, I will go whole-heartedly with the Minister and say—

Protect it.

In order to establish industries in this country. But he should not put a prohibitive tariff on the article which the kaffir only is using as such a course is open to misconstruction.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The reason for the course we have adopted is that if we had not taken the sheeting out of the previous class it could be sold as blankets and defeat the whole object of the previous item. If you tax the kaffir blanket and let the sheets come in, they will be sold for the same purpose.

Mr. CHRISTIE:

I would like to ask the Minister if he cannot see his way to meet this position. After all, the whole argument has been the desire to encourage industries and it seems to me that with a 15 per cent. suspended duty the Minister ought to have all he requires in that connection. I would ask that he give this due consideration, otherwise it does seem to us, in view of the difficulties in establishing such an industry—with all due respect to the Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, who has been telling of the likelihood of such an amount of machinery being ordered to set this up—one can look well ahead before that can be a really effective method of making these blankets in this country. I do not subscribe to the statement that only in Lancashire can these blankets be made, but I do say that it is going to be many years before these blankets can be made in such a way that the consumer—the native in particular—will feel the alteration and during the transitory stage this is only going to be a taxing operation, not a protective tariff at all. It is simply a matter of raising revenue, and is not going to have any effect in encouraging this industry. My idea, and I think the Labour party are with me, is that in supporting a protective tariff it is to encourage industry, but this tariff is simply taxing people who can least afford to pay that particular tax. I feel that the Minister ought to go into this matter further, and I suggest that he leave over the consideration of this item to a later stage. I think that is a fair request, and will give us an opportunity to consider more carefully what this will mean, not only to this House to-night but to the people in the country for the next few years.

†Mr. KENTRIDGE:

I hope the Minister will accede to the suggestion put forward by the hon. member for Langlaagte (Mr. Christie). I hope he will hold the item over until he can consult with his advisers and ascertain what the position will be. Either this particular duty is intended purely for revenue purposes—in which case I am definitely against it—or it is intended to establish a cotton blanket industry in South Africa. If it is intended entirely for revenue purposes it will not have the desired effect, for the very illuminating figures the Minister quoted to us showed how the wholesale and retail people have been exploiting the natives and make it apparent that the only effect of imposing this particular duty will be that the merchants and retailers will pass on the additional customs duty to the consumer, plus the interest and the profit on the higher price. The Minister quoted the position of these articles during the war, but he omitted to state that at that time, in addition to the fact that the consumers had to pay so much extra for these articles there was a tremendous shrinkage in the use of these things. So if the effect of a higher price is going to cause, as I anticipate, a shrinkage in the use of the articles the Minister will lose the additional revenue he expects to receive as the result of higher duties on these importations. If, on the other hand, this increased duty is to be used for the purpose of establishing an industry here—I think I am speaking for all the Labour members when I say we are behind no-one in our desires to see South Africa become self-supporting—then one has to look at these things from a reasonable point of view. One would not suggest the imposition of a prohibitive tariff for the purpose of establishing an industry for which we have not the raw material, or even if it were established it would become a hybrid industry like match making in Natal, where they used to import the wood and the sulphur and to employ the cheapest possible coolie labour. I rather suspect that the cotton industry of which the Minister of Posts told us, would be such a hybrid industry. We don’t want a repetition of that. The material for the manufacture of these blankets, mainly shoddy, has to be imported. The only reasonable way to encourage the manufacture of these things in South Africa would be by the bounty system, under which the country would only pay on what was produced, or else the suspended duty which would be imposed when the manufacturers were prepared to employ labour on reasonable conditions. If on the other hand he is trying to take advantage of the tariff for the purpose of importing the necessary shoddy, because that is what most of the stuff will be, and using the cheapest possible labour, then I say an industry of that kind is of no value to South Africa and will not benefit the white people. The only effect of the tariff will be to reduce the number of blankets used by the people and it will have the effect of diverting the trade from one part of Europe to another. Let me read the figures for 1924. During 1924 we imported cotton blankets from the United Kingdom to the value of_ £388,000, from Belgium, with its convict labour and sweated conditions, £189,000, from France with its falling franc £44,000, from Germany, with its unsatisfactory labour conditions, £54,000 and from Italy, with its Mussolini, £63,000. Without hesitation I submit the only effect of this tariff will be to divert that trade from the United Kingdom where labour conditions are better, to places like Italy and Belgium where conditions are bad. I don’t think the Minister desires that state of affairs and I hope he will take into consideration the request to hold this matter over for further consideration.

Question put: That the duty proposed to be omitted in item 61, sub-item (a) (i), stand part of the tariff; and Mr. Jagger called for a division.

Upon which the Committee divided:

Ayes—51.

Barlow, A. G.

Bergh, P. A.

Beyers, F. W.

Boydell, T.

Brits, G. P.

Brown, D. M.

Conradie, J. H.

Conroy, E. A.

Creswell, F. H. P.

De Villiers, A. I. E.

De Villiers, W. B.

De Wet, S. D.

Du Toit, F. J.

Fourie, A. P. J.

Grobler, P. G. W.

Hattingh, B. R,

Havenga, N. C.

Hay, G. A.

Hertzog, J. B. M.

Heyns, J. D.

Kemp, J. C. G.

Kentridge, M.

De Roux, S. P.

Malan, C. W.

Malan, D. F.

Malan, M. L.

McMenamin, J. J.

Moll, H. H.

Mostert, J. P.

Mullineux, J.

Naudé, A. S.

Pearce, C.

Pienaar, J. J.

Pretorius, J. S. F.

Heyburn, G.

Rood, W. H.

Roos, T. J. de V.

Roux, J. W. J. W.

Steyn, C. F.

Steytler, L. J.

Strachan, T. G.

Swart, C. R.

Te Water, C. T.

Van der Merwe, N. J.

Van Niekerk. P. W. le R.

Visser, T. C.

Waterston, R. B.

Werth, A. J.

Wessels, J. B.

Tellers: Vermooten, O. S.; Wessels J. H. B.

Noes—31.

Alexander, M.

Anderson, H. E. K.

Arnott, W.

Ballantine, R.

Bates, F. T.

Byron, J. J.

Chaplin, F. D. P.

Coulter, C. W. A.

Grobler, H. S.

Heatlie, C. B.

Jagger, J. W.

Lennox, F. J.

Marwick, J. S.

Miller, A. M.

Moffat, L.

Nieuwenhuize, J.

O’Brien, W. J.

Oppenheimer, E.

Payn, A. O. B.

Reitz, D.

Rider, W. W.

Robinson, C. P.

Sephton, C. A. A.

Smartt, T. W.

Smuts, J. C.

Struben, R. H.

Stuttaford, R.

Van Heerden, G. C.

Van Zyl, G. B.

Tellers: Collins, W. R,; de Jager, A. L.

Question accordingly affirmed and first part of amendments proposed by Mr. Jagger and Mr. Alexander dropped.

Second part of amendment proposed by Mr. Alexander put and negatived.

With leave of the Committee remaining amendments withdrawn.

Class IV, as printed, put and agreed to.

On Class V.

†Mr. JAGGER:

I should like to say a few words on this; I might just as well point out what the consequences of some of these proposals are. It is somewhat difficult to understand on what principle this tariff has been drawn up, because I see that No. 9, buckets, household and sanitary, the duty there has been increased practically from 17 per cent. to 25 per cent. When I look over at page 11. No. 132, I see that perambulators and baby carts have been reduced from 17 per cent. to 10 per cent. It is pretty evident, I should think, that the gentlemen who drew up this tariff are either young men going to be married or young men with families; because I have noticed the same thing in regard to several items; for instance, it has been remarked that the duty on babies’ foods has been reduced somewhat. Here are buckets, household and sanitary—

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

That is to protect a local industry.

†Mr. JAGGER:

Yes, that I have no doubt. Then dairy utensils and machinery—

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

They get a lot of stuff in free that they formerly had to pay duty on.

†Mr. JAGGER:

Then there are milk cans and buckets, cheese cloths and so forth, increased from 3 per cent. to 20 per cent.—in fact, they were practically free, because there was a rebate of 3 per cent. I hone the farmers will agree to this, out of patriotism. There is only one industry for this particular article, and that is in East London, and you are going to tax the farmers of the whole country for this industry; but if they like it is all right. Then I see motor cars. It comes to this, that you are going to tax the English car more than the American car.

An HON. MEMBER:

A more expensive car.

†Mr. JAGGER:

The more expensive car, of course, comes from Great Britain. But hon. members prefer to tax the British car and let the American car in at lower rates. Then there is item 130, motor truck and trailers.

An HON. MEMBER:

The farmers cannot afford that; only cheque book farmers.

†Mr. JAGGER:

Many farmers have gone in for them, and others besides cheque book farmers. I think this is a backward step. The old duty was 3 per cent. with a rebate of 3 per cent. and now it is 20 per cent. Then there is another point, and here I am going to move an amendment. Item 155, page 12. 3 inch mesh fencing, that is jackal proof, is free; but fencing of any other mesh is raised from 3 per cent. to 5 per cent. and 15 per cent. It simply means that fencing with a smaller mesh, which is used for poultry, has to pay 15 per cent. There is no sense or reason in taxing wire netting which happens to be of a smaller mesh than three inches. I move—

In item 155. sub-item (c), to omit “15 per cent.” in the fourth and fifth columns, respectively, and to substitute “3 per cent.” †Mr. ALEXANDER:

Here is where my hon. friend and I must part company. It was only when I thought the Government was going on wrong lines that I differed from them, but in this case the Government is proceeding on right lines. For some years I have brought up the question of encouraging the building of motor car bodies in this country, but my voice was as of one “crying alone in the wilderness.” The building of wagons and carts used to be a very big industry in South Africa, but with the growing use of motor vehicles this industry is gradually disappearing. The people employed in that industry could very easily devote their energies to the construction of motor car bodies. Motor car chassis should be allowed to come in free. In Australia I believe you are not allowed to import a new motor car without at the same time importing at least one chassis, and I am told that in the vast majority of cases only chassis are imported into that country. The big motor people have sent their people to Australia and have started motor body building factories. If you make the tariff effective you would have the Ford and other companies building such factories in South Africa for the making of motor bodies here. The special tariff proposed for chassis is a step in the right direction. Now, with regard to wire netting. There is one industry we have been pleading for in this House for years, and that is the wire fencing and netting industry.

Mr. JAGGER:

One man.

†Mr. ALEXANDER:

In history one man has been able to do a great deal. The farmers in this House realize the value of this netting. Ask the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden). This one firm, the Premier Gate, Fence and Wire Company, Limited, has been turning out wire fencing and netting far better than that imported. That is his view, and he is a progressive farmer. Farmers must realize with regard to things required on a farm that it is their duty to help those men who are struggling along in manufactures. Under the Minister’s new proposal the three-inch mesh remains, but the limitations as to width and guage are unfortunately taken away in the case of fencing. Protection has been given in the case of other fencing and netting, but the three-inch mesh comes in free, and now my hon. friend wants to considerably reduce the protection given. The firms are struggling against large manufacturers overseas who are trying to crush them out. Imported netting in South Africa to-day is dumped at a much cheaper price than in England. As soon as they have crushed this firm out of existence the price will go up all round. This factory is in Cape Town, and I wish hon. members would go and visit it. Brackets used in the railway carriages come from that factory, and the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) would be surprised if he knew how much, as Minister of Railways, he bought from that factory. Some of the finest things you have in netting you have there. Jackal netting, one of the best parts of their production, comes in duty free. They ask for a duty on this to be put on the suspended list, and as soon as they get protection you will have every bit of jackal fencing manufactured in the Union. Seventy-five per cent. of their machines are built to manufacture the three-inch mesh with the guage and width as originally proposed. I will tell you why they should have protection. If you take that out they might as well close down. If the Government will not put the jackal proof fencing on the suspended list then there should be some system of bounties introduced. I can assure hon. members that if the slightest encouragement is given to this particular industry, then you are going to have the whole of South Africa getting its wire material for all purposes from the Union. I have the authority of the hon. member for Graaff-Reinet (Mr. I. P. van Heerden) and other members who have been to see this factory, for saying that these things are used on farms and that the article produced in this factory in Cape Town is cheaper and better than the imported article.

Mr. JAGGER:

Why do you require protection then?

†Mr. ALEXANDER:

I was just telling the hon. member why. Because the big manufacturers in England and abroad have come to the conclusion that the South African industry must not be allowed to exist, and they are dumping these things in South Africa. The whole reason why they are asking for protection is because the big manufacturers overseas have come to the conclusion that this industry here is a menace to them and they want to get rid of it. I hope the Minister will not only keep this item on his programme, but that he will see his way to giving them more protection in the future. The Minister has done what, I am sure, will be a lasting benefit to this country, and also to the manufacturers.

†Mr. STRUBEN:

Although I believe in protecting industry, and as a protectionist, I have no fault to find with Item 155 (c), in regard to Item (a) which the last speaker (Mr. Alexander) would like to see again have a duty put on it, I want to say this, that, however important this one industry may be, in giving it protection, we must recognize that, having the country jackal-proofed to the fullest extent possible, and as rapidly as possible, is more important than that protection. Owing to strong representations made to the Minister in regard to this item, he has allowed any width of netting used for jackal fencing to enter duty free. The last speaker says that we can now put up jackal-netting fences “any height we like.” The real reason for this extension is that 5 feet netting is necessary for large portions of the country, where stones are absent or scarce, the lowest foot being used for turning down so as to prevent the jackals from getting through, instead of using stone packing. With regard to the amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger). I would point out that the amount of wire netting used for poultry runs is not very large, and I hope he will not persist in his amendment. It is absolutely essential to get this country fenced with jackal-proofed fencing as soon as possible and as cheaply as possible. With regard to the tax on motor-cars. I would like to ask the Minister whether he does not think be is rather retarding progress, because, after all, the motor-car to-day is not a matter of luxury, but a very necessary vehicle for farmers and business men, both as passenger cars or for transport. I think if he had left the tax on the old basis, he would have given all the protection necessary there. I want to ask the Minister whether he can consider item 129 (d), second-hand cars brought in by individuals. We want people to come into this country. Say a man has a car and some furniture; don’t you think where it is his bona fide property a man coming into the country to settle might be let off with a very much lower duty than you have down here now? I know a case of a man who has come out here to settle. He had bought his car at a certain price, and showed his invoice to the customs officials, but the latter queried it and put an entirely arbitrary value on the car, and charged him a high duty. I would like the Minister to consider whether he cannot make a remission there. Under this same hardware section come cutlery and certain furniture. There again I would suggest to the Minister that, in order to make it easier for people coming into this country to settle and make their homes here, people whom both sides of the House have said they welcomed to this country, they should be allowed to bring in a certain amount of stuff duty free. We have people coming in with heirlooms and plate and silver which they have had for generations in their families, and household effects generally, and they have to pay very high duties on these. Would it not be possible to make a discrimination between the man smuggling in stuff for sale, and the man who is bringing in what has been his property for years, and who is vouched for by a reputable and recognized organization as being a bona fide prospective settler? I would suggest to the Minister that he should consider doing something of that sort. Allow a man, say, £250 worth of personal and household effects free of duty, if he is married allow a further amount of £100 worth for his wife, and allow say, a total amount of £500 worth, with a sliding scale of allowance for any children.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I may inform the hon. member that we propose to put in the Bill a provision for the free admission of household effects or persons coming to settle in the Union when such effects are their bona fide property, and not for sale or disposal to other persons. We shall have to put a limit on the amount. Of course, the hon. member will see it will be impossible to include motorcars.

†Mr. PEARCE:

I am surprised again at the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Tagger).

Mr. JAGGER:

Oh, indeed.

†Mr. PEARCE:

Yes, I am very sorry to think that he tries to put a difficulty in the discussion of every item stating they should come in free, then he takes up a different attitude when it comes to the Government reducing the duty on perambulators, because they are encouraging or assisting, to a certain extent, the family man. As regards wire netting, big manufacturers in England and America have, in the past, manufactured this netting and sold it at a commercial value in the respective countries. But they found out that, by increasing their output, they did not increase their overhead charges; they found, in the case of wire netting that, by keeping their machinery going from one day to another, they made a greater profit, even if they sold the surplus in foreign countries at a lower price than the price at which it was sold in their own country. What will be the result, if we allow this dumping? It will simply mean that we shall not be able to create and build up any industry in this country. It is true that imports are subject, to a certain extent, to dumping charges; but, on the other hand, they are able, as I have mentioned, to sell in other countries much cheaper than in their own. We find that, in recent years, certain companies have re-imported commodities into England and sold it at a price less than that at which the manufacturer was selling it in England, the country of its origin, really proving that this increase of output, selling at a lower rate, was detrimental to other countries, therefore I believe that we should not only put a tax on the manufactured goods that come into this country, but especially enforce it where they are selling at a lower rate than in their own country.

Sir THOMAS SMARTT:

I wish to make an appeal to the Minister. Latterly farmers, as well as commercial people, have been finding how essential it is, in their business, to use motor vans and tractors. Large numbers of farmers are going in for these motor tractors. The Minister proposes to increase the duty to 20 per cent. If that is done, it will place a very heavy handicap not only upon the commercial class who use their vans but upon the farmers. I would also like to make an appeal in connection with motor cars. The majority of the motor cars (of £400 and under as provided for in the schedule) pay a duty of 20 per cent. and the cars exceeding £400 up to £600 pay 22 per cent and over £600 25 per cent. If the Minister will enquire, he will find that, for some considerable time before this tariff was published, there were American motor car interests that were not at all unmindful of their business in this country and the possibility of furthering it. I feel perfectly certain that the proposed new duty is going to give a special preference to the American motor car to the detriment of the English car which costs more money because it is a more sound and lasting article. We have cut down the preference to a very large extent. The Minister is not going to assist the British manufacturer by giving them easy terms, so far as motor bicycles are concerned, as the British have the control of the Motor cycle trade, but the Minister is going to put an exceedingly heavy handicap on the British car manufacturer. I hope the Minister will reconsider this before the Bill comes before the House. I am as anxious as the hon. member for Liesbeek (Mr. Pearce) is to encourage legitimate South African manufacturing industries and by that I mean industries using a large proportion of raw material produced in this country. It is absolutely necessary if you are going to place our wool industry on an equal basis with that of Australia or the Argentine that vermin proof fencing should be more extensively used. Hundreds of thousands of pounds have been invested in the last few years in the erection of vermin proof fencing which is revolutionizing farming operations. It would be a very serious thing to place a heavy handicap on the farmers by putting a duty on vermin proof fencing, for the farmers should be encouraged to enclose their holdings with the least possible delay with vermin-proof fencing. If a duty of 15 per cent. is placed on vermin proof fencing it would be a very serious obstacle to its more extensive use. The Drought Commission was unanimous in recommending that the Government should give every possible assistance to encourage farmers to fence their holdings. In the Colesberg or Hanover districts, there are hundreds of miles of jackal proof fencing five feet high which is answering admirably.

Mr. MOFFAT:

I would like to ask a question of the Minister with reference to the 20 per cent. duty on motor vans and motor trucks. In item 147 I see steam wagons come in free. For what reason is this difference made? In support of the hon. member for Cape Town (Central) (Mr. Jagger) I quite appreciate jackal proof fencing coming in free. It is of undoubted benefit to the farmer. We should also have some consideration for the poultry farmer. I do not see why the poultry farmer, starting a new industry likely to be of great importance to this country, should be handicapped by this duty of 15 per cent.

Mr. ALEXANDER:

He will not be handicapped. He will be able to get it here.

Mr. JAGGER:

He will have to pay more for it.

Mr. MOFFAT:

One member referred to the dumping duty to prevent manufacturers importing and dumping jackal netting into the country. I have been fencing with jackalproof fences for 20 years, and I don’t find in any way that the increased cost was brought about by any system of dumping and then trying to put a high price on the article in this country.

†Maj. G. B. VAN ZYL:

I am sorry to disagree with the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt). He says he is not prepared to support any industry unless they start by using the raw products of the country. They gave England a preference of 3 per cent. when England was not using the raw material of that country. They were importing it from abroad. The hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat) wants to protect the poultry farmer. There are other sections of the community not considered when we put heavy duties on. The party to be protected here is the farmer, who was sufficiently protected in the tariff on page 387 before the change was made. What the industry really objects to this: That wire netting made in England and sold there at 28s. 6d. is sold in this country at 21s. That is dumping pure and simple. I have information that wire has even been quoted in this country at 19s., the same wire as sold in England at 28s. 6d. If you are out to protect industries, you must protect industries all round. This industry has had no protection in the past. In the first instance the Minister protected wire over 4 ft. Why do away with that? Here we have an industry which has been struggling for a long while, an industry in which a lot of money has been spent, an industry which is employing a large number of men, and yet we do not give it any protection. I want to appeal to the Minister, that if it is the principle of the Government to protect industries, let him be consistent and give this industry a certain amount of protection.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I have done so.

†Maj. G. B. VAN ZYL:

What are you protecting? Anything over five feet.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I am protecting the three inch mesh.

†Maj. G. B. VAN ZYL:

If the Minister does not wish to accept the amendment of the hon. member for Cape Town (Hanover Street) (Mr. Alexander), let him copy what has been done in Australia and give a bounty. In practically all our legislation this session we find Australia copied. Copy her legislation here and give a bounty if you must let the farmer gain everything.

†Mr. HEATLIE:

I would like to say a word about wire netting. I am a farmer, and I think I know a little about it also. There are very few people living about the towns who know what an enormous amount of wire netting is being used in the country, and no factory which you have got here can supply one-tenth or even one-hundredth of their requirements. Then you have got wire and wire. Although you may be importing the best drawn wire from Europe to this country, you may not be making the best wire netting. I do not think the factories here are equipped so as to enable them to properly carry out the last and most important process. I do not wish to say anything against this industry, but I do not think we are justified in asking all the users of netting wire here to pay a heavy duty to maintain a small factory.

†Mr. MADELEY:

I do not like this method of protection, but, having accepted this new tariff, I would like to put this to the hon. member who spoke just now (Mr. Heatlie). He animadverted against a tariff on wire netting, because he said it was going to cost the farmer more. Does he know the historic example of the Standard Oil Trust? Foolish people who thought they were getting oil cheap for the moment bought it and allowed all these people to be shut down, and then the company did exactly as they liked. The only stumbling block in the way of the hon. member for Worcester (Mr. Heatlie) and his farming friends is this little firm itself. If the Minister were to withdraw this protection from all the wire netting he would soon find out what would happen. What I am afraid of is that you are going to help to-night what are called the “big five” of wire netting manufacturers in England, and if you do close this factory down South Africa would be an open field for the “big five” and South Africa would have to pay what they pleased. Cut out competition—although I am not much of a lover of competition—and then the people from whom competition is removed bleed the people to whom they are selling their commodities. That is going to be the position in South Africa.

Mr. NEL:

Does that apply to sugar too?

†Mr. MADELEY:

Oh, yes, to sugar too.

An HON. MEMBER:

To chocolates?

†Mr. MADELEY:

The hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) made a touching appeal to the hon. member for Liesbeek (Mr. Pearce) to go through various parts and see the tremendous amount of wire netting used. It is becoming a recognized thing for farmers, especially those with sheep, to reinforce with wire netting, but how much difference is it going to make? How much difference is the tariff going to make to these people at all events, because we have the prices before us and it is a very few shillings difference that is made in a 50 yards roll. These people can well afford to pay that in order to save themselves from the consequences once this little firm’s competition is cut out. The best way to protect, after all, is to protect by means of paying a bounty.

†Mr. McMENAMIN:

I would like to appeal to the Minister to remodel No. 129 with the idea of giving practical effect to his evident intention of assisting the motor body building industry. The treasurer, in order to encourage the motor trade, suggests a 10 per cent. preference, but I contend that will be quite ineffective. Let us consider the example of Australia. The duty on motor bodies was first imposed there in 1911, and in the case of single seated bodies there was a duty of £17, and on double seated bodies of £24 10s.; but that had no real effect. It had the same effect as the treasurer’s preference in our case will have. There was no business done at all, and in 1921, the Government, realizing that the preference given was a dead letter, increased the tariff as follows: On single seated bodies £40. on double seated bodies £60. or an ad valorem duty of 55 per cent. The result of that was immediate. Factories sprang up all over the country, and some of the big motor concerns were forced to come into the country to protect their trade. To-day, motor car body building is a big industry in Australia. All the favourite cars in Australia can be purchased either with locally made or imported bodies, and in some instances there is a difference of from £20 to £50 by buying the local body. The motor industry is really in its infancy, but already in South Africa, on this year’s contracts, there are something like 15,000 cars coming into the country, and if we manufactured the bodies for these we would immediately have an industry representing a million and a half pounds annually. I am sure it is an industry which would be practicable in South Africa; but it will never be so unless the treasurer goes the whole way and puts on a really protective duty, and the only way we can do that is to remodel item 129 with the idea of allowing chassis to come in at the present rate of 20 per cent. and then allowing for the bodies. This mere 10 per cent. preference will never lead us anywhere. The policy I have suggested would be a practical one as against the ideal one which been brought before the House by the Minister.

†*Mr. STEYTLER:

I just wish to express the hope that the hon. Minister will not agree to the tax being put on imported fencing wire. It is one of the articles which is used not to the extent of hundreds of thousands of pounds but millions of pounds. All the farmers are convinced of it that there is only one way of successfully farming with sheep and that is to fence in the sheep farmers and it would be a very wrong policy to tax this kind of wire. I am very glad that the original proposal of the hon. Minister has been altered. The original intention was only to allow “fifteen” thickness of wire to come in free and to tax “fourteen” thickness, but that has been altered and all the wire of three inch width can now come in free. I will give the hon. Minister the assurance that the farmers appreciate this very much.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

The hon. member for Queenstown (Mr. Moffat) has raised question of the steam wagons that are ad mitted free of duty, as against the motor trucks which have to pay a fairly heavy duty. The steam wagons are used in out of the way places. They are a heavy article replacing the traction engines formerly used by the farmers, while the motor tractor is used in towns for the conveyance of goods, etc. In the case of motor trucks there is a body to be built. In the case of motor trucks without bodies the duty is only 5 per cent. The hon. member for Boksburg (Mr. McMenamin) has raised the question of the advisability of increasing the duty on chassis in order to establish a body building industry here. I am afraid we cannot take the example of Australia where they sell a very much larger number of cars than is the case here. This is an experiment and he shall have to see how it is going to work. The board has gone very carefully into the matter and these are the recommendations they have made. The representatives of a firm, which came here some time ago to establish a motor car assembling station, pointed out to us that they were very anxious to increase their operations, but whereas they sell 30,000 cars in Australia, here they sell only 4.000. We import only 15,000 cars of all makes per year, so any firm which desires to establish assembling stations here will have to spend a lot of money While we are not going as far as Australia has gone, we will see how things go and perhaps we may revise our policy later on, but I don’t think it will be advisable to do it now. The right hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Sir Thomas Smartt) has urged that the motor car is no longer a matter of luxury. It is true that the motor car is coming more and more into extended use, but I must get revenue some where. We have reduced the duties on articles used by farmers in many instances. The right hon. gentleman has raised the question of the sliding scale of duties on cars. He thinks that we are going to benefit the American motor car manufacturer at the expense of the English manufacturer. I do not see why that should be so. There are light English as well as light American cars and heavy American cars as well as heavy English cars. I am afraid the difficulty with the English motor car manufacturer is this—he will not study our conditions and our bad roads, but sends us a heavy car of light power. I am afraid we shall not be able to rectify that with our customs duties, and that we snail not be able to make the position easier for English car manufacturers unless they supply us with what the country wants. I do not think the right hon. member is fair in trying to suggest that these recommendations have been framed in order to benefit the American car manufacturer.

Sir THOMAS SMARTT:

I did not suggest that as far as you personally were concerned

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

I think he hon. member will find it is one of the underlying principles that you levy your duties on the ad valorem basis. Let the man who wants to buy an expensive car pay more than the man was buys a cheaper car. That is what we are trying to do.

Mr. JAGGER:

It is a pity it works the other way.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE:

They sell cheaper English cars, as well as American cars. The reason why English cars have no market is because they do not study our conditions. They are fine cars for the towns, but our roads in the country districts require a lighter car of a higher power.

Sir THOMAS SMARTT:

The cars I referred to are the cars between £400 and £650, English made cars for towns and country—the car to last for many years, which is superior to other cars. The effect of having for the cars under £400 a duty of 20 per cent. and from £400 to £600 from 22 per cent. to 25 per cent. is going to penalize the English car which is, in many cases, a better article, like English machinery, and if a man could afford to pay for it, he would get better life out of it than he would out of the other cars.

Amendment put and negatived.

Class V, as printed, put and agreed to.

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

House Resumed:

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

The House adjourned at 11.18 p.m.

« Previous Debate

Next Debate »