justice." The segregation plan received the support, among many others, of Sir Matthew Nathan, an ex-governor of Natal, and Gen. Hertzog. But it was opposed by those who, like Mr. P. W. Schreiner and Mr. Patrick Duncan (a leading member of the Unionist party) , regarded it as both wrong and impolitic to put hindrances in the way of the advancement of the natives in civilization and industrial efficiency. Mr. Duncan in a striking pamphlet published in Oct. 1912 (" Suggestions for a Native Policy ") admitted the dangers foreseen by the segregationists, but believed the remedy to be in European immigration on a large scale. " Nothing else," he declared, " will save S.A. for the European race." But to immigration on a large scale the Dutch community was definitely opposed, and it was not till 1920 that the Government made any strenuous effort to attract white settlers to the country.
A motion brought forward at the Unionist Congress in Johan- nesburg (Nov. 21 1912) to commit the party to the policy of segregation was defeated, the previous question being carried by 91 votes to 7. Opinion being so divided the Union Government found great difficulty in shaping its native policy. As a tempo- rary measure a Native Land Act was passed in 1913 which pro- hibited the further acquisition of land by natives or from natives an Act which led to vehement protests from native associa- tions and leaders of native thought, while a legal decision was obtained that the provision of the Act did not apply to the Cape province. The Act had set up a commission, under the chair- manship of Sir William Beaumont, which had for its object the ascertainment of what land areas should be allocated to natives and those from which they should be excluded. The commission reported in 1916 and a Native Affairs Administration bill was introduced in 1917, chiefly as a means of ascertaining public opinion, native as well as white. It embodied the principle of separate areas in rural districts. After exhaustive consideration Parliament in 1920 passed a Native Affairs Act which was in effect a half-way segregation measure. The Act, for which Gen. Smuts was largely responsible, was based on the principle that the white man is the permanent and predominant factor in the civilization and government of S. Africa. But it was not repressive to the black man. It set aside areas for the exclusive occupation of the natives in which they would have greater opportunities than before for obtaining local self-government, it opened the way to a system of representative native congresses which would express authoritatively native opinion on intended legislation, and it held out the prospect of the development of native institutions parallel to but separate from those of the whites. In short Gen. Smuts, the great advocate for the union of the two European races in S.A., was equally earnest in his efforts to keep the streams of white and (nascent) black civiliza- tion apart. A feature of the Act of 1920 was the establishment of a permanent Native Affairs Commission to deal with the position of natives in urban areas, education and the Pass Law system, in all of which matters it was admitted that the natives had not received fair treatment. The Act was regarded by the white community Dutch extremists apart as a piece of constructive statesmanship, and its policy received the approval of the most responsible leaders of the natives. But danger lay in the in- flammable language and actions of less responsible, and less educated agitators, working on the mass of their fellows, scarcely emerged from barbarism, and in the equally pernicious utterances of the white extremists. Events in 1920-1 showed the peril attendant on any mishandling of the native question.
The promotion of trade and agriculture occupied much of
the energies of the people and Government. A prolonged
. drought lasting from Oct. 1911 to Nov. 1912 the
Trade and * . , . ,-, v . . , ' . j
Tariffs. most severe experienced in S.A. since 1862, affected chiefly Natal, the Transvaal and the Transkei. The severe losses sustained forced attention to the need of more scientific farming and to irrigation works, upon which the Govern- ment expended 500,000 in 1912. In 1919 there was another very serious drought involving the country in an expenditure of 16,000,000. This led to the appointment of a commission in 1920 to enquire into drought, soil erosion and other allied prob-
lems. One result was to emphasize the need of water storage in connexion with irrigation. In Oct. 1912 a State Land and Agri- cultural Bank began operations in the Union, and a similar institution was established in Rhodesia.
Much diversity of view existed as to the tariff policy of the Union. Early in 1912 a commission, of which Sir T. M. Cullinan was chairman, appointed to enquire into the conditions of trade and industries reported in favour of increased duties on wheat, flour, sugar, tea, clothing and furniture, declaring that it was " not only necessary that a policy of protection should be adopted, but that there should be continuity of policy." Two influential members presented minority reports in favour of the "open-door." Rhodesian feeling was in favour of a lower tariff, and it was suggested that Rhodesia might withdraw from the Customs Union rather than bear greater fiscal burdens. At Johannesburg on Nov. 19 1912 Sir Thomas Smartt declared that a plank in the Unionist party's platform was a tariff primarily for revenue purposes, combined with a policy for the encourage- ment of industries for the general benefit and the extension of the existing imperial preference. This was, in the main, the solution adopted. Tariffs and rebates were fixed by various Acts of Parliament passed between 1914 and 1919, designed to afford relief to home manufactures, the majority newly established. An Industries Advisory Board was set up in Oct. 1916, consisting for the most part of business men, and early in 1917 a Scientific and Technical Committee was instituted. There followed in 1921 the creation of a Board of Trade and Industries, and a definite policy of industrial development was undertaken by the Government. But Mr. F. S. Malan, Minister of Mines (and then acting Prime Minister) addressing the convention of the Federated Chamber of Industries at Port Elizabeth (July 25 1921) declared that the Government had no intention of "go- ing in for an out-and-out protective policy." And Col. Reitz (Minister of Lands) told the sugar planters of Zululand that " the consumer must be protected. Higher tariffs would mean dearer prices."
One great department of state, the Railways and Harbour Board, was required by the Act of Union to be run with due regard to agricultural and industrial development and not as a producer of revenue for extraneous purposes. The Board built needed railway lines and undertook harbour works, though nothing material was done to enlarge the docks at Table Bay, a matter which provoked strong protests from the citizens of Cape Town. Mr. Sauer, the minister in charge of the department whose budget was separate from that of the general budget of the Union took an independent view of his duties and as early as July 1911 differences arose between him and his colleagues, especially with Mr. Hull, the Finance Minister. Mr. Hull had also to meet the attacks of Mr. Merriman, the most accomplished parliamentarian and ablest financier in the House of Assembly and a very candid friend of the Ministry. Mr. Merriman de- nounced the Government's financial proposals as predatory and extravagant, while Mr. Hull alleged that railway expenditure was incurred without Treasury sanction that there had been a tendency to regard the railway and harbour administration as something for which the Government had no collective responsi- bility. General Botha admitted that the Cabinet had not been sufficiently consulted in railway matters and on May 18 1912 Mr. Hull resigned. A reconstruction of the Ministry was post- poned until after the close of the parliamentary session (June 24), when the chief changes made were the appointment of Mr. Henry Burton (an ex-Cape minister), to the Ministry of Railway and Harbours, while Mr. Sauer became Minister of Agriculture, an office which Gen. Botha had combined with the premiership.
The differences between Mr. Hull and Mr. Sauer were shortly afterwards forgotten in consequence of the attitude taken up by Gen. Hertzog, who now began publicly to assail the principles upon which the Union had been estab- J^ a ^ lished. To what extent Hertzog was supported or policy. restrained by ex-President Steyn is uncertain; but Steyn, whose opinion would have been decisive with a large section of the Dutch community, did nothing publicly to counter-
