to the land on which he lived, in many instances, that they could not
rackrent him off it. These were the people that the Bill wished
to dispossess and drive off the land. The figures placed before them
showed that THE LAND HELD BY EUROPEANS PER HEAD WAS FIFTY TIMES THE AMOUNT
HELD PER HEAD BY THE NATIVES. Surely there was no need at the present time
for legislation which would prevent Natives getting a little more land
than they now had. He did not think it could be put down
to the fault of the Native if he was willing to buy and live on land
rather than pay rent. The figures given in this connexion
were very instructive. EIGHT ACRES PER HEAD WERE HELD BY THE NATIVES
IN THE CAPE, SIX ACRES IN NATAL, ABOUT 1 1/2 ACRES in the Transvaal,
and about one-third of an acre in the Free State. He thought this Bill
was perhaps coming on a little before there was any necessity for it.

--
* Creatures.
--

MR. C. G. FICHARDT (Ladybrand) said he felt very much
that the Bill that was before the House did not carry out
all that should be carried out, and that was equality of justice.
IF THEY WERE TO DEAL FAIRLY WITH THE NATIVES OF THIS COUNTRY,
THEN ACCORDING TO POPULATION THEY SHOULD GIVE THEM FOUR-FIFTHS OF THE COUNTRY,
OR AT LEAST A HALF. How were they going to do that? As he said
in the earlier part of his remarks, he was prepared to accept the Bill
as something to go on with, but he hoped that in the future
it would not constitute a stumbling-block. He would much rather have seen
that the matter had been gone into more fully, and that some scheme
had been laid before them so that they might have more readily been able
to judge how the Bill would work. It was because of all these difficulties