Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Garrett Alley, and the PG Online
Distributed Proofreading Team.






A CENTURY OF WRONG

ISSUED BY

F.W. REITZ

_State Secretary of the South African Republic_

WITH PREFACE BY

W.T. STEAD

"Audi Alteram Partem"

LONDON:

"REVIEW OF REVIEWS" OFFICE, MOWBRAY HOUSE, NORFOLK STREET, W.C.




CONTENTS.

                                                                    PAGE.
PREFACE. _By W.T. Stead_.                                       vii.

INTRODUCTION                                                           1

THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE                                                  4

THE FOUNDING OF NATAL                                                 13

THE ORANGE FREE STATE                                                 17

THE SOUTH AFRICAN REPUBLIC                                            23

THE CONVENTIONS OF 1881 AND 1884                                      33

CAPITALISTIC JINGOISM--FIRST PERIOD                                   37

CAPITALISTIC JINGOISM--SECOND PERIOD                                  49

CONCLUSION                                                            89

APPENDIX A.--Lord Derby's Dispatch on Convention of 1884             101
         B.--The Annexation of the Diamond Fields                    105
         C.--The Reply to Mr. Chamberlain's Dispatch on Grievances   109
         D.--The Final Dispatch of Mr. State Secretary Reitz         127
         E.--The Text of the Conventions, 1852, 1881, and 1884       128

INDEX                                                                149




PREFACE.


"In this awful turning point of the history of South Africa, on the eve
of the conflict which threatens to exterminate our people, it behoves us
to speak the truth in what may be, perchance, our last message to the
world."

Such is the _raison d'être_ of this book. It is issued by State
Secretary Reitz as the official exposition of the case of the Boer
against the Briton. I regard it as not merely a duty but an honour to be
permitted to bring it before the attention of my countrymen.

Rightly or wrongly the British Government has sat in judgment upon the
South African Republic, rightly or wrongly it has condemned it to death.
And now, before the executioner can carry out the sentence, the accused
is entitled to claim the right to speak freely--it may be for the last
time--to say why, in his opinion, the sentence should not be executed. A
liberty which the English law accords as an unquestioned right to the
foulest murderer cannot be denied to the South African Republic. It is
on that ground that I have felt bound to afford the spokesman of our
Dutch brethren in South Africa the opportunity of stating their case in
his own way in the hearing of the Empire.

Despite the diligently propagated legend of a Reptile press fed by Dr.
Leyds for the purpose of perverting public opinion, it is indisputable
that so far as this country is concerned Mr. Reitz is quite correct in
saying that the case of the Transvaal "has been lost by default before
the tribunal of public opinion."

It is idle to point, in reply to this, to the statements that have
appeared in the press of the Continent. These pleadings were not
addressed to the tribunal that was trying the case. In the British press
the case of the Transvaal was never presented by any accredited counsel
for the defence. Those of us who have in these late months been
compelled by the instinct of justice to protest against the campaign of
misrepresentation organised for the purpose of destroying the South
African Republic were in many cases so far from authorised exponents of
the South African Dutch that some of them--among whom I may be reckoned
for one--were regarded with such suspicion that it was most difficult
for us to obtain even the most necessary information from the
representatives of the Government at Pretoria. Nor was this suspicion
without cause--so far at least as I was concerned.

For nearly a quarter of a century it might almost have been contended
that I was one of the leading counsel for the prosecution. First as the
friend and advocate of the Rev. John Mackenzie, then as the friend and
supporter of Mr. Cecil Rhodes, and latterly as the former colleague and
upholder of Sir Alfred Milner, it had been my lot constantly, in season
and out of season, to defend the cause of the progressive Briton
against the Conservative Boer, and especially to advocate the Cause of
the Reformers and Uitlanders against the old Tory Administration of
President Kruger. By agitation, by pressure, and even, if need be, in
the last resort by legitimate insurrection, I had always been ready to
seek the establishment of a progressive Liberal Administration in
Pretoria. And I have at least the small consolation of knowing that if
any of the movements which I defended had succeeded, the present crisis
would never have arisen, and the independence of the South African
Republic would have been established on an unassailable basis. But with
such a record it is obvious that I was almost the last man in the Empire
who could be regarded as an authorised exponent of the case of the
Boers.

That in these last months I have been forced to protest against the
attempt to stifle their independence is due to a very simple cause. To
seek to reform the Transvaal, even by the rough and ready means of a
legitimate revolution, is one thing. To conspire to stifle the Republic
in order to add its territory to the Empire is a very different thing.
The difference may be illustrated by an instance in our own history.
Several years ago I wrote a popular history of the House of Lords, in
which I showed, at least to my own satisfaction, that for fifty years
our "pig-headed oligarchs"--to borrow a phrase much in favour with the
War Party--had inflicted infinite mischief upon the United Kingdom by
the way in which they had abused their power to thwart the will of the
elected representatives of the people. I am firmly of opinion that our
hereditary Chamber has done a thousand times more injury to the subjects
of the Queen than President Kruger has ever inflicted upon the
aggrieved Uitlanders. I look forward with a certain grim satisfaction to
assisting, in the near future, in a semi-revolutionary agitation against
the Peers, in which some of our most potent arguments will be those
which the War Party has employed to inflame public sentiment against the
Boers. But, notwithstanding all this, if a conspiracy of Invincibles
were to be formed for the purpose of ending the House of Lords by
assassinating its members, or by blowing up the Gilded Chamber and all
its occupants with dynamite, I should protest against such an outrage as
vehemently as I have protested against the more heinous crime that is
now in course of perpetration in South Africa. And the very vehemence
with which I had in times past pleaded the cause of the People against
the Peers would intensify the earnestness with which I would endeavour
to avert the exploitation of a legitimate desire to end the Second
Chamber by the unscrupulous conspirators of assassination and of
dynamite. Hence it is that I seize every opportunity afforded me of
enabling the doomed Dutch to plead their case before the tribunal which
has condemned them, virtually unheard.

In introducing _A Century of Wrong_ to the British public, I carefully
disassociate myself from assuming any responsibility for all or any of
the statements which it contains. My _imprimatur_ was not sought, nor is
it extended to the history contained in _A Century of Wrong_, excepting
in so far as relates to its authenticity as an exposition of what our
brothers the Boers think of the way in which we have dealt with them for
the last hundred years.

That is much more important than the endorsement by any Englishman as
to the historical accuracy of the statements which it contains. For what
every judicial tribunal desires, first of all, is to hear witnesses at
first hand. Hitherto the British public has chiefly been condemned to
second-hand testimony. In the pages of _A Century of Wrong_ it will, at
least, have an opportunity of hearing the Dutch of South Africa speak
for themselves.

There is no question as to the qualifications of Mr. F.W. Reitz to speak
on behalf of the Dutch Africander. Although at this moment State
Secretary for President Kruger, he was for nearly ten years Chief
Justice and then President of the Orange Free State, and he began his
life in the Cape Colony. The family is of German origin, but his
ancestors migrated to Holland in the seventeenth century and became
Dutch. His grandfather emigrated from Holland to the Cape, and founded
one of the Africander families. His father was a sheep farmer; one of
his uncles was a lieutenant in the British Navy.

Mr. Reitz is now in his fifty-sixth year, and received a good English
education. After graduating at the South African College he came to the
United Kingdom, and finished his studies at Edinburgh University, and
afterwards at the Inner Temple, where he was called to the Bar in 1868.
He then returned to the Cape, and, after practising as a barrister in
the Cape courts for six years, was appointed Chief Justice of the Orange
Free State, a post which he held for fifteen years. He was then elected
and re-elected as President of the Orange Free State. In 1893 he paid a
lengthy visit to Europe and to the United Kingdom. After Dr. Leyds was
appointed to his present post as foreign representative of the South
African Republic, Mr. Reitz was appointed State Secretary, and all the
negotiations between the Transvaal and Great Britain passed through his
hands.

Mr. Reitz's narrative is not one calculated to minister to our national
self-conceit, but it is none the worse on that account. Of those who
minister to our vanity we have enough and to spare, with results not
altogether desirable. In the long controversy between the Boers and the
missionaries Mr. Reitz takes, as might be expected, the view of his own
people.

An English lady in South Africa writing to the _British Weekly_ of
December 21st, in reply to the statement of the Rev. Dr. Stewart, makes
some observations on this feud between the Boers and the missionaries,
which it may be well to bear in mind in discussing this question. The
lady ("I.M.") says:--

     Dr. Stewart naturally starts from the mission question. I speak
     as the daughter of one of the greatest mission supporters that
     South Africa has ever known when I say that the earliest
     missionaries who came to this country were to a very large extent
     themselves the cause of all the Boer opposition which they may
     have had to encounter. When they arrived, they found the Boers at
     about the same stage of enlightenment with regard to missions as
     the English themselves had been in the time of Carey. And yet, in
     spite of prejudice and ignorance, every Boer of any standing was
     practically doing mission work himself, for when, according to
     unfailing custom, the "Books" were brought out morning and
     evening for family worship, the slaves were never allowed to be
     absent, but had to come and receive instruction with the rest of
     the family. But the tone and methods which the missionaries
     adopted were such as could not fail to arouse the aversion of the
     farmers, their great idea being that the coloured races, utter
     savages as yet, should be placed upon complete equality with
     their superiors. At Earl's Court we have recently seen something
     of how easily the natives are spoilt, and they were certainly not
     better in those days. When, however, the Boers showed that they
     disapproved of all this, the natives were immediately taught to
     regard them as their oppressors, and were encouraged to
     insubordination to their masters, and the ill-effects of this
     policy on the part of the missionaries has reached further than
     can be told. May I ask was this the tone that St. Paul adopted in
     his mission work among the oppressed slaves of his day?... It is
     not those who do _not_ know the Boers, like Dr. Stewart, but
     those who know them best, like Dr. Andrew Murray, who are not
     only enamoured of their simple lives, but who know also that with
     all their disadvantages and their positive faults they are still
     a people whose rule of life is the Bible, whose God is the God of
     Israel, and who as a nation have never swerved from the covenant
     with that God entered into by their fathers, the Huguenots of
     France and the heroes of the Netherlands.

Upon this phase of the controversy there is no necessity to dwell at
present, beyond remarking that those who are at present most disposed to
take up what may be regarded as the missionary side should not forget
that they are preparing a rod for their own backs. The Aborigines
Protection Society has long had a quarrel with the Boers, but if our
Imperialists are going to adopt the platform of Exeter Hall they will
very soon find themselves in serious disagreement with Mr. Cecil Rhodes
and other Imperialist heroes of the hour. That the Dutch in South Africa
have treated the blacks as the English in other colonies have treated
the aborigines is probably true, despite all that Mr. Reitz can say on
their behalf. But, whereas in Tasmania and the Australian Colonies the
black fellows are exterminated by the advancing Briton, the immediate
result of the advent of the Dutch into the Transvaal has been to
increase the number of natives from 70,000 to 700,000, without including
those who were attracted by the gold mines. In dealing with native races
all white men have the pride of their colour and the arrogance of power.
The Boers, no doubt, have many sins lying at their door, but it does not
do for the pot to call the kettle black, and so far as South Africa is
concerned, the difference between the Dutch and British attitudes toward
the native races is more due to the influence of Exeter Hall and the
sentiment which it represents than to any practical difference between
English and Dutch Colonists as to the status of the coloured man. The
English under Exeter Hall have undoubtedly a higher ideal as to the
theoretical equality of men of all races; but on the spot the arrogance
of colour is often asserted as offensively by the Briton as by the Boer.
The difference between the two is, in short, that the Boer has adjusted
his practice to his belief, whereas we believe what we do not practice.
That the black population of the Transvaal is conscious of being treated
with exceeding brutality by the Boers is disproved by the fact that for
months past all the women and children of the two Republics have been
left at the absolute mercy of the natives in the midst of whom they
live.

The English reader will naturally turn with more interest to Mr. Reitz's
narrative of recent negotiations than to his observations upon the
hundred years of history which he says have taught the Dutch that there
is no justice to be looked for at the hands of a British Government. The
advocates of the war will be delighted to find that Mr. Reitz asserts
in the most uncompromising terms the right of the Transvaal to be
regarded as an Independent Sovereign International State. However
unpleasant this may be to Downing Street, the war has compelled the
Government to recognise the fact. When it began we were haughtily told
that there would be no declaration of war, nor would the Republics be
recognised as belligerents. The war had not lasted a month before this
vainglorious boast was falsified, and we were compelled to recognise the
Transvaal as a belligerent State. It is almost incredible that even Sir
William Harcourt should have fallen into the snare set for him by Mr.
Chamberlain in this matter. The contention that the Transvaal cannot be
an Independent Sovereign State because Article 4 of the Convention of
1884 required that all treaties with foreign Powers should be submitted
for assent to England may afford a technical plea for assuming that it
was not an Independent Sovereign International State. But, as Mr. Reitz
points out, no one questions the fact that Belgium is an International
Independent Sovereign State, although the exercise of her sovereignty is
limited by an international obligation to maintain neutrality. A still
stronger instance as proving the fact that the status of a sovereign
State is not affected by the limitation of the exercise of its
sovereignty is afforded by the limitation imposed by the Treaty of Paris
on the sovereign right of the Russian Empire to maintain a fleet in the
Black Sea. To forbid the Tsar to put an ironclad on the sea which washes
his southern coast was a far more drastic limitation of the inalienable
rights of an Independent International Sovereign State than the
provision that treaties affecting the interests of another Power should
be subject to the veto of that Power, but no one has protested that
Russia has lost her international status on account of the limitation
imposed by the Treaty of Paris. In like manner Mr. Reitz argues that the
Transvaal, being free to conduct its diplomacy, and to make war, can
fairly claim to be a Sovereign International State. The assertion of
this fact serves as an Ithuriel's spear to bring into clear relief the
significance of the revival by Mr. Chamberlain of the Suzerainty of
1881. Upon this point Mr. Reitz gives us a plain straightforward
narrative, the justice and accuracy of which will not be denied by
anyone who, like Sir Edward Clarke, takes the trouble to read the
official dispatches.

I turn with more interest to Mr. Reitz's narrative of the precise
differences of opinion which led to the breaking-off of negotiations
between the two Governments. Mr. Chamberlain, it will be remembered,
said in his dispatch he had accepted nine-tenths of the conditions laid
down by the Boers if the five years' franchise was to be conceded. What
the tenth was which was not accepted Mr. Chamberlain has never told us,
excepting that it was "a matter of form" which was "not worth a war."
Readers of Mr. Reitz's narrative will see that in the opinion of the
Boers the sticking point was the question of suzerainty. If Mr.
Chamberlain would have endorsed Sir Alfred Milner's declaration, and
have said, as his High Commissioner did, that the question about
suzerainty was etymological rather than political, and that he would say
no more about it, following Lord Derby's policy and abstaining from
using a word which was liable to be misunderstood, there would have been
no war. So far as Mr. Reitz's authority goes we are justified in saying
that the war was brought about by the persistence of Mr. Chamberlain in
reviving the claim of suzerainty which had been expressly surrendered in
1884, and which from 1884 to 1897 had never been asserted by any British
Government.

Another point of great importance is the reference which Mr. Reitz makes
to the Raid. On this point he speaks with much greater moderation than
many English critics of the Government. Lord Loch will be interested in
reading Mr. Reitz's account of the way in which his visit to Pretoria
was regarded by the Transvaal Government. It shows that it was his visit
which first alarmed the Boers, and compelled them to contemplate the
possibility of having to defend their independence with arms. But it was
not until after the Jameson Raid that they began arming in earnest. As
there is so much controversy upon this subject, it may be well to quote
here the figures from the Budget of the Transvaal Government, showing
the expenditure before and after the Raid.

                   Public     Special   Sundry
        Military.  Works.    Payments. Services.  Total.
            £        £          £         £         £
1889     75,523    300,071    58,737   171,088    605,419
1890     42,999    507,579    58,160   133,701    742,439
1891    117,927    492,094    52,486    76,494    739,001
1892     29,739    361,670    40,276    93,410    528,095
1893     19,340    200,106   148,981   132,132    500,559
1894[1]  28,158    260,962    75,859   163,547    521,526
1895[2]  87,308    353,724   205,335   838,877  1,485,244
1896    495,618    701,022   682,008   128,724  2,007,372
1897    396,384  1,012,686   248,864   135,345  1,793,279
1898[3] 163,451    383,033   157,519   100,874    804,877

Of the Raid itself Mr. Reitz speaks as follows:--

     The secret conspiracy of the Capitalists and Jingoes to overthrow
     the South African Republic began now to gain ground with great
     rapidity, for just at this critical period Mr. Chamberlain became
     Secretary of State for the Colonies. In the secret correspondence
     of the conspirators, reference is continually made to the
     Colonial Office in a manner which, taken in connection with later
     revelations and with a successful suppression of the truth, has
     deepened the impression over the whole world that the Colonial
     Office was privy to, if not an accomplice in, the villainous
     attack on the South African Republic.

     Nor has the world forgotten how, at the urgent instance of the
     Africander party in the Cape Colony, an investigation into the
     causes of the conflict was held in Westminster; how that
     investigation degenerated into a low attack upon the Government
     of the deeply maligned and deeply injured South African Republic,
     and how at the last moment, when the truth was on the point of
     being revealed, and the conspiracy traced to its fountain head in
     the British Cabinet, the Commission decided all of a sudden not
     to make certain compromising documents public.

     Here we see to what a depth the old great traditions of British
     Constitutionalism had sunk under the influence of the
     ever-increasing and all-absorbing lust of gold, and in the hands
     of a sharp-witted wholesale dealer, who, like Cleon of old, has
     constituted himself a statesman.

When Mr. Reitz wrote his book he did not know that immediately after the
Raid the British Government began to accumulate information, and to
prepare for the war with the Republic which is now in progress. The
reason why Mr. Reitz did not refer to this in _A Century of Wrong_ was
because documents proving its existence had not fallen into the hands of
the Transvaal Government until after the retreat from Glencoe. Major
White and his brother officers who were concerned in the Raid were much
chaffed for the incredible simplicity with which he allowed a private
memorandum as to preparations for the Raid to fall into the hands of the
Boers. His indiscretion has been thrown entirely into the shade by the
simplicity which allowed War Office documents of the most secret and
compromising nature to fall into the hands of the Boers, showing that
preparations for the present war began immediately after the defeat of
the Raid. The special correspondent of Reuter with the Boers telegraphed
from Glencoe on October 28th as follows:--

     The papers captured at Dundee Camp from the British unveil a
     thoroughly worked out scheme to attack the independence of both
     Republics as far back as 1896, notwithstanding constant
     assurances of amity towards the Free State.

     Among these papers there are portfolios of military sketches of
     various routes of invasion from Natal into the Transvaal and Free
     State, prepared by Major Grant, Captain Melvill, and Captain Gale
     immediately after the Jameson Raid.

     A further portfolio marked secret styled "Reconnaissance Reports
     of Lines of Advance through the Free State" was prepared by
     Captain Wolley, on the Intelligence Division of the War Office,
     in 1897, and is accompanied by a special memorandum, signed by
     Sir Redvers Buller, to keep it secret.

     Besides these there are specially executed maps of the Transvaal
     and Free State, showing all the natural features, also a further
     secret Report of Communications in Natal north of Ladysmith,
     including a memorandum of the road controlling Lang's Nek
     position.

     Further, there is a short Military Report on the Transvaal,
     printed in India in August last, which was found most
     interesting. The white population is given at 288,000, of whom
     the Outlanders number 80,000, and of the Outlanders 30,000 are
     given as of British descent--which figures the authorities regard
     as much nearer the truth than Mr. Chamberlain's statements made
     in the House of Commons.

     One report estimates that 4,000 Cape and Natal Colonists would
     side with the Republics in case of war, and that the small
     armament of the Transvaal consists of 62,950 rifles, and that the
     Boers would prove not so mobile or such good marksmen as in the
     War of Independence.

     Further, the British did not think much of the Johannesburg and
     Pretoria forts.

     A further secret Report styled "Military Notes on the Dutch
     Republics of South Africa," and numbers of other papers, not yet
     examined, were also found, and are to be forwarded to Pretoria.

     The Free State burghers are now more than ever convinced that it
     was the right policy for them to fight along with the Transvaal,
     and they say, since they have seen the reports, that they will
     fight with, if possible, more determination than ever.

It may be contended, no doubt, upon our part that these private reports
were none other than those which every Government receives from its
military attachés, but it must be admitted that their discovery at the
present moment is most inopportune for those who wish to persuade the
Free State that they can rely upon the assertions of Great Britain that
no design was made upon their independence. If at this moment the
portfolios of a German Staff Officer were to fall into the hands of an
English correspondent, and detailed plans for invading England were to
be published in all the newspapers as having been drawn up by German
officers told off for that purpose, it would not altogether tend to
reassure us as to the good intentions of our Imperial neighbour. How
much more serious must be the publication of these documents seized at
Dundee upon a people which is actually at war.

The concluding chapter of Mr. Reitz's eloquent impeachment of the
conduct of Great Britain in South Africa is devoted to a delineation of
what he calls Capitalistic Jingoism. It is probable that a great many
who will read with scant sympathy his narrative of the grievances of his
countrymen in the earlier part, of the century will revel in the
invective which he hurls against Mr. Rhodes and the Capitalists of the
Rand. If happier times return to South Africa, Mr. Reitz may yet find
the mistake he has made in confounding Mr. Rhodes with the mere
dividend-earning crew, who brought about this war in order to diminish
the cost of crushing gold by five or six shillings a ton. In the
realisation of the ideal of Africa for the Africanders Mr. Rhodes might
be more helpful to Mr. Reitz and the Dutch of South Africa than any
other living man. Whether it is possible for them to forget and forgive
the future alone will show. But at present it seems rather as if Mr.
Reitz sees nothing between Africanderism and Capitalistic Jingoism but
war to the death.

Mr. Reitz breaks off his narrative at the point immediately before the
Ultimatum. Those curious politicians who begin their survey of the war
from the launching of that declaration will, therefore, find nothing in
_A Century of Wrong_ to interest them. But those who take a fresh and
intelligent view of a long and complicated historical controversy will
welcome the authoritative exposition of the causes which, in the opinion
of the authors of the Ultimatum, justified, and, indeed, necessitated
that decisive step. To what Mr. Reitz has said it is only necessary to
add one fact.

The Ultimatum was dated October 9th. It was the natural response to the
menace with which the British Government had favoured them three days
previous, when on October 6th they issued the formal notice calling out
the Reserves for the avowed object of making war upon the South African
Republic.

Whether they were right or wrong, it is impossible to withhold a tribute
of admiration and sympathy for the little States which confront the
onslaughts of their Imperial foe with such heroic fortitude and serene
courage. As Dr. Max Nordau remarks in the _North American Review_ for
December:--

     The fact that a tiny people faces death without hesitation to
     defend its independence against an enemy fabulously superior in
     number, or to die in the attempt, presents an aspect of moral
     beauty which no soul, attuned to higher things, will disregard.
     Even friends and admirers of England--yea, even the English
     themselves--strongly sense the pathos in the situation of the
     Dutch Boers, who feel convinced that they are fighting for their
     national existence, and agree that it equals the pathos of
     Leonidas, William Tell, and Kosciusko.

Over and above all else the note in the State Secretary's appeal which
will vibrate most loudly in the British heart is that in which he
appeals to his countrymen to cling fast to the God of their forefathers,
and to the righteousness which is sometimes slow in acting, but which
never slumbers or forgets. "It proceeds according to eternal laws,
unmoved by human pride and ambition. As the Greek poet of old said, it
permits the tyrant, in his boundless self-esteem, to climb higher and
higher, and to gain greater honour and might, until he arrives at the
appointed height, and then falls down into the infinite depths."

Who is there who remembers the boastings of the British press at the
outbreak of the war can read without awe the denunciations of the Hebrew
seers against the nations and empires who in arrogance and pride forgot
the Lord their God?

"Behold, I am against thee, O thou most proud, saith the Lord God of
Hosts: for thy day is come, the time that I will visit thee. And the
most proud shall stumble and fall, and none shall raise him up."

This, after all, is the great issue which underlies everything. Is there
or is there not in the affairs of men a Providence which the ancients
pictured as the slow-footed Nemesis, but which we moderns have somewhat
learned to disregard? "If right and wrong, in this God's world of ours,
are linked with higher Powers," is the great question which the devout
soul, whether warrior or saint, has ever answered in one way. When in
this country a leading exponent of popular Liberalism declares that
"morally we can never win, but that physically we must and shall," we
begin to realise how necessary is the chastisement which has fallen upon
us for our sins. If this interpretation of the situation be even
approximately correct, the further we go the worse we shall fare. It is
vain for us to kick against the pricks.

  W.T. STEAD.
  _January 1st, 1900._

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: 1894.--Year of Lord Loch's visit (in June) to Pretoria.]

[Footnote 2: 1895.--Conspiracy, culminating in the Raid.]

[Footnote 3: 1898.--First nine months.]




A CENTURY OF WRONG.

       *       *       *       *       *




INTRODUCTION.


BROTHER AFRICANDERS!

Once more in the annals of our bloodstained history has the day dawned
when we are forced to grasp our weapons in order to resume the struggle
for liberty and existence, entrusting our national cause to that
Providence which has guided our people throughout South Africa in such a
miraculous way.

The struggle of now nearly a century, which began when a foreign rule
was forced upon the people of the Cape of Good Hope, hastens to an end;
we are approaching the last act in that great drama which is so
momentous for all South Africa; we have reached a stage when it will be
decided whether the sacrifices which both our fathers and we ourselves
have made in the cause of freedom have been offered in vain, whether the
blood of our race, with which every part of South Africa has been, as it
were, consecrated, has been shed in vain; and whether by the grace of
God the last stone will now be built into the edifice which our fathers
began with so much toil and so much sorrow.

[Sidenote: The alternative of Africanderdom.]

The hour has struck which will decide whether South Africa, in jealously
guarding its liberty, will enter upon a new phase of its history, or
whether our existence as a people will come to an end, whether we shall
be exterminated in the deadly struggle for that liberty which we have
prized above all earthly treasures, and whether South Africa will be
dominated by capitalists without conscience, acting in the name and
under the protection of an unjust and hated Government 7,000 miles away
from here.

[Sidenote: The necessity of historical retrospect.]

In this hour it behoves us to cast a glance back at the history of this
great struggle. We do so not to justify ourselves, because liberty, for
which we have sacrificed everything, has justified us and screened our
faults and failings, but we do so in order that we may be, as it were,
sanctified and prepared for the conflict which lies before us, bearing
in mind what our people have done and suffered by the help of God. In
this way we may be enabled to continue the work of our fathers, and
possibly to complete it. Their deeds of heroism in adventures with Bantu
and Briton shine forth like guiding stars through the history of the
past, in order to point out the way for posterity to reach that goal for
which our sorely tried people have made such great sacrifices, and for
which they have undergone so many vicissitudes.

The historical survey will, moreover, aid in bringing into stronger
relief those naked truths to which the tribunal of impartial history
will assuredly testify hereafter, in adjudging the case between
ourselves and our enemy. And the questions which present themselves for
solution in the approaching conflict have their origin deep in the
history of the past; it is only by the light of that history that it
becomes possible to discern and appreciate the drifting straws which
float on the currents of to-day. By its light we are more clearly
enabled to comprehend the truth, to which our people appeal as a final
justification for embarking upon the war now so close at hand.

History will show convincingly that the pleas of humanity, civilisation,
and equal rights, upon which the British Government bases its actions,
are nothing else but the recrudescence of that spirit of annexation and
plunder which has at all times characterised its dealings with our
people.




THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.


The cause for which we are about to take up arms is the same, though in
somewhat different form, as that for which so many of our forefathers
underwent the most painful experiences centuries ago, when they
abandoned house and fatherland to settle at the Cape of Good Hope, to
enjoy there that freedom of conscience which was denied them in the land
of their birth. In the beautiful valleys lying between the blue
mountains of the Cape of Good Hope they planted the seed-germ of
liberty, which sprang up and has since developed with such startling
rapidity into the giant tree of to-day--a tree which not only covers a
considerable area in this part of the world, but will yet, in God's good
time, we feel convinced, stretch out its leafy branches over the whole
of South Africa. In spite of the oppressive bonds of the East India
Company, the young settlement, containing the noblest blood of old
Europe as well as its most exalted aspirations, grew so powerfully that
in 1806, when the Colony passed into the hands of England, a strong
national sentiment and a spirit of liberty had already been developed.

[Sidenote: The Africander spirit of liberty]

As is forcibly expressed in an old document dating from the most
renowned period of our history, there grew out of the two stocks of
Hollanders and French Huguenots "a united people, one in religion,
united in peaceful reverence for the law, but with a feeling of liberty
and independence equal to the wide expanse of territory which they had
rescued as a labour of love from the wilderness of nature, or from its
still wilder aboriginal inhabitants." When the Dutch Government made way
for that of Great Britain in 1806, and, still more, when that change was
sealed in 1814 by a transaction in which the Prince of Orange sold the
Cape to Great Britain for £6,000,000 against the wish and will of the
inhabitants, the little settlement entered upon a new phase of its
history, a phase, indeed, in which its people were destined by their
heroic struggle for justice, to enlist a world-wide sympathy on their
behalf.

[Sidenote: England's native policy.]

Notwithstanding the wild surroundings and the innumerable savage tribes
in the background, the young Africander nation had been welded into a
white aristocracy, proudly conscious of having maintained its
superiority notwithstanding its arduous struggles. It was this sentiment
of just pride which the British Government well understood how to wound
in its most sensitive part by favouring the natives as against the
Africanders. So, for example, the Africander Boers were forced to look
with pained eyes on the scenes of their farms and property devastated by
the natives without being in a position to defend themselves, because
the British Government had even deprived them of their ammunition. In
the same way the liberty-loving Africander burgher was coerced by a
police composed of Hottentots, the lowest and most despicable class of
the aborigines, whom the Africanders justly placed on a far lower social
level than that of their own Malay slaves.

[Sidenote: Slachter's Nek.]

No wonder that in 1815 a number of the Boers were driven into rebellion,
a rebellion which found an awful ending in the horrible occurrence of
the 9th of March, 1816, when six of the Boers were half hung up in the
most inhuman way in the compulsory presence of their wives and children.
Their death was truly horrible, for the gallows broke down before the
end came; but they were again hoisted up in the agony of dying, and
strangled to death in the murderous tragedy of Slachter's Nek. Whatever
opinions have been formed of this occurrence in other respects, it was
at Slachter's Nek that the first bloodstained beacon was erected which
marks the boundary between Boer and Briton in South Africa, and the eyes
of posterity still glance back shudderingly through the long vista of
years at that tragedy of horror.

[Sidenote: The missionaries.]

This was, however, but the beginning. Under the cloak of religion
British administration continued to display its hate against our people
and nationality, and to conceal its self-seeking aims under cover of the
most exalted principles. The aid of religion was invoked to reinforce
the policy of oppression in order to deal a deeper and more fatal blow
to our self-respect. Emissaries of the London Missionary Society
slandered the Boers, and accused them of the most inhuman cruelties to
the natives. These libellous stories, endorsed as they were by the
British Government, found a ready ear amongst the English, and the
result was that under the pressure of powerful philanthropic opinion in
England our unfortunate people were more bitterly persecuted than ever,
and were finally compelled to defend themselves in courts of law
against the coarsest accusations and insults. But they emerged from the
ordeal triumphantly, and the records of the criminal courts of the Cape
Colony bear indisputable witness to the fact that there were no people
amongst the slave-owning classes of the world more humane than the
Africander Boers. Their treatment of the natives was based on the theory
that natives ought not to be considered as mature and fully developed
people, but that they were in reality children who had to be won over to
civilisation by just and rigid discipline; they hold the same
convictions on this subject to-day, and the enlightened opinion of the
civilised world is inclining more and more to the same conclusion. But
the fact that their case was a good one, and that it was triumphantly
decided in their favour in the law courts, did not serve to diminish,
but rather tended to sharpen, the feeling of injustice with which they
had been treated.

[Sidenote: Emancipation of the slaves.]

A livelier sense of wrong was quickened by the way in which the
emancipation of the slaves--in itself an excellent measure--was carried
out in the case of the Boers.

Our forefathers had become owners of slaves chiefly imported in English
ships and sold to us by Englishmen. The British Government decided to
abolish slavery. We had no objection to this, provided we received
adequate compensation.[4] Our slaves had been valued by British
officials at three millions, but of the twenty millions voted by the
Imperial Government for compensation, only one and a quarter millions
was destined for South Africa; and this sum was payable in London. It
was impossible for us to go there, so we were forced to sell our rights
to middlemen and agents for a mere song; and many of our people were so
overwhelmed by the difficulties placed in their way that they took no
steps whatever to receive their share of the compensation.

Greyheads and widows who had lived in ease and comfort went down
poverty-stricken to the grave, and gradually the hard fact was borne in
upon us that there was no such thing as Justice for us in England.

[Sidenote: Slavery at the Cape.]

Froude, the English historian, hits the right nail on the head when he
says:--

     [5] "Slavery at the Cape had been rather domestic than predial; the
     scandals of the West India plantations were unknown among them.

     Because the Dutch are a deliberate and slow people, not given to
     enthusiasm for new ideas, they fell into disgrace with us, where
     they have ever since remained. The unfavourable impression of
     them became a tradition of the English Press, and, unfortunately,
     of the Colonial Office. We had treated them unfairly as well as
     unwisely, and we never forgive those whom we have injured."

[Sidenote: The Glenelg policy.]

[6] But this was not all. When the English obtained possession of the
Cape Colony by convention, the Fish River formed the eastern boundary.
The Kaffirs raided the Colony from time to time, but especially in 1834,
when they murdered, plundered, and outraged the helpless Colonists in an
awful and almost indescribable manner. The Governor was ultimately
prevailed upon to free the strip of territory beyond the Fish River from
the raids of the Kaffirs, and this was done by the aid of the Boers. But
Lord Glenelg, the Colonial Secretary, reversed this policy and restored
the whole territory to the natives. He maligned the Boers in even more
forcible terms than the emissaries of the London Missionary Society, and
openly favoured the Kaffirs, placing them on a higher pedestal than the
Boers. The latter had succeeded in rescuing their cattle from the
Kaffirs, but were forced to look on passively while the very same
cattle, with the owner's brand marks plainly visible, were sold by
public auction to defray the cost of the commando. It was useless to
hope for justice from Englishmen. There was no security for life and
property under the flag of a Government which openly elected to uphold
Wrong. The high-minded descendants of the proudest and most stubborn
peoples of Europe had to bend the knee before a Government which united
a commercial policy of crying injustice with a veneer of simulated
philanthropy.

[Sidenote: The Dutch language.]

But it was not only in regard to the Natives that the Boers were
oppressed and their rights violated. When the Cape was transferred to
England in 1806, their language was guaranteed to the Dutch inhabitants.
This guarantee was, however, soon to meet the same fate as the treaties
and conventions which were concluded by England with our people at later
periods.

The violator of treaties fulfilled its obligation by decreeing in 1825
that all documents were for the future to be written in English.
Petitions in the language of the country and complaints about bitter
grievances were not even acknowledged. The Boers were excluded from the
juries because their knowledge of English was too faulty, and their
causes and actions had to be determined by Englishmen, with whom they
had nothing in common.

[Sidenote: The Great Trek.]

After twenty years' experience of British administration it had become
abundantly clear to the Boers that there was no prospect of peace and
prosperity before them, for their elementary rights had been violated,
and they could only expect oppression. They were without adequate
guarantees of protection, and their position had become intolerable in
the Cape Colony.

They decided to sell home, farm, and all that remained over from the
depredations of the Kaffirs, and to trek away from British rule. The
Colony was at this time bounded on the north by the Orange River.

[Sidenote: Legality of the Trek.]

[7] At first, Lieutenant-Governor
Stockenstrom was consulted; but he was of opinion that there was no law
which could prevent the Boers from leaving the Colony and settling
elsewhere. Even if such a statute existed, it would be tyrannical, as
well as impossible, to enforce it.

The Cape Attorney-General, Mr. Oliphant, expressed the same opinion,
adding that it was clear that the emigrants were determined to go into
another country, and not to consider themselves British subjects any
longer. The same thing was happening daily in the emigration from
England to North America, and the British Government was and would
remain powerless to stop the evil.

The territory to the north of the Orange River and to the east of the
Drakensberg lay outside the sphere of British influence or authority,
and was, as far as was then known, inhabited by savages; but the Boers
decided to brave the perils of the wilderness and to negotiate with the
savages for the possession of a tract of country, and so form an
independent community rather than remain any longer under British rule.

[Sidenote: The Manifesto of Piet Retief.]

In the words of Piet Retief, when he left Grahamstown:--

     We despair of saving the Colony from those evils which threaten
     it by the turbulent and dishonest conduct of vagrants who are
     allowed to infest the country in every part; nor do we see any
     prospect of peace or happiness for our children in a country thus
     distracted by internal commotions.

     We complain of the severe losses which we have been forced to
     sustain by the emancipation of our slaves, and the vexatious laws
     which have been enacted respecting them.

     We complain of the continual system of plunder which we have for
     years endured from the Kaffirs and other coloured classes, and
     particularly by the last invasion of the Colony, which has
     desolated the frontier district and ruined most of the
     inhabitants.

     We complain of the unjustifiable odium which has been cast upon
     us by interested and dishonest persons, under the name of
     religion, whose testimony is believed in England to the exclusion
     of all evidence in our favour; and we can foresee, as the result
     of this prejudice, nothing but the total ruin of the country.

     We quit this Colony under the full assurance that the English
     Government has nothing more to require of us, and will allow us
     to govern ourselves without its interference in future.

     We are now leaving the fruitful land of our birth, in which we
     have suffered enormous losses and continual vexation, and are
     about to enter a strange and dangerous territory; but we go with
     a firm reliance on an all-seeing, just, and merciful God, whom we
     shall always fear and humbly endeavour to obey.

     In the name of all who leave this Colony with me.

     P. RETIEF.

[Sidenote: The English in pursuit.]

We journeyed then with our fathers beyond the Orange River into the
unknown north, as free men and subjects of no sovereign upon earth. Then
began what the English Member of Parliament, Sir William Molesworth,
termed a strange sort of pursuit. The trekking Boer followed by the
British Colonial Office was indeed the strangest pursuit ever witnessed
on earth. [8] The British Parliament even passed a law in 1836 to impose
punishments beyond their jurisdiction up to the 25th degree south, and
when we trekked further north, Lord Grey threatened to extend this
unrighteous law to the Equator. It may be remarked that in this law it
was specially enacted that no sovereignty or overlordship was to be
considered as established thereby over the territory in question.

[Sidenote: The Trichardt Trek.]

The first trek was that of Trichardt and the Van Rensburgs. They went to
the north, but the Van Rensburgs were massacred in the most horrible way
by the Kaffirs, and Trichardt's party reached Delagoa Bay after
indescribable sufferings in a poverty-stricken condition, only to die
there of malarial fever.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 4: Theal, _History of the Boers_, page 64.]

[Footnote 5: _Oceana_, page 34.]

[Footnote 6: Theal, page 62.]

[Footnote 7: Theal, 102.--Cachet.]

[Footnote 8: 6 & 7, William IV., ch. 57.]




THE FOUNDING OF NATAL.


[Sidenote: Murder of Piet Retief.]

The second trek was equally unfortunate. Piet Retief had duly paid for
and obtained possession from Dingaan, chief of the Zulus, of that tract
of territory now known as Natal, the latter, incited by some Englishmen,
treacherously murdered him and his party on the 6th February, 1838; 66
Boers and 30 of their followers perished. The Great Trek thus lost its
most courageous and noble-minded leader. [9] Dingaan then sent two of
his armies, and they overcame the women and children and the aged at
Boesmans River (Blaauw-krantz), where the village of Weenen now stands;
282 white people and 252 servants were massacred.

Towards the end of the year we entered the land of this criminal with a
small commando of 464 men, and on the 16th December, 1838--since known
as "Dingaan's Day," the proudest in our history--we overthrew the
military might of the Zulus, consisting of 10,000 warriors, and burnt
Dingaan's chief kraal.

[Sidenote: No extension of British territory.]

[10] After that we settled down peaceably in Natal, and established a
new Republic. The territory had been purchased with our money and
baptised with our blood. But the Republic was not permitted to remain in
peace for long. The Colonial Office was in pursuit. The Government first
of all decided upon a military occupation of Natal, for, as Governor
Napier wrote to Lord Russell on the 22nd June, 1840, "it was apparently
the fixed determination of Her Majesty's Government not to extend Her
Colonial possessions in this quarter of the Globe." The only object of
the military occupation was to crush the Boers, as the Governor, Sir
George Napier, undisguisedly admitted in his despatch to Lord Glenelg,
of the 16th January, 1838. The Boers were to be prevented from obtaining
ammunition, and to be forbidden to establish an independent Republic. By
these means he hoped to put a stop to the emigration. Lord Stanley
instructed Governor Napier on the 10th April, 1842, to cut the emigrant
Boers off from all communication, and to inform them that the British
Government would assist the savages against them, and would treat them
as rebels.

Twice we successfully withstood the military occupation; more English
perished while in flight from drowning than fell by our bullets.

Commissioner Cloete was sent later to annex the young Republic as a
reward for having redeemed it for civilisation.

[Sidenote: Protest of Natal]

[11] Annexation, however, only took place under strong protest. On the
21st February, 1842, the Volksraad of Maritzburg, under the chairmanship
of Joachim Prinsloo, addressed the following letter to Governor
Napier:--

     We know that there is a God, who is the Ruler of heaven and
     earth, and who has power, and is willing to protect the injured,
     though weaker, against oppressors. In Him we put our trust, and
     in the justice of our cause; and should it be His will that total
     destruction be brought upon us, our wives and children, and
     everything we possess, we will with due submission acknowledge to
     have deserved from Him, but not from men. We are aware of the
     power of Great Britain, and it is not our object to defy that
     power; but at the same time we cannot allow that might instead of
     right shall triumph, without having employed all our means to
     oppose it.

[Sidenote: The Boer women]

[12] The Boer women of Maritzburg informed the British Commissioner
that, sooner than subject themselves again to British sway, they would
walk barefoot over the Drakensberg to freedom or to death. [13] And they
were true to their word, as the following incident proves. Andries
Pretorius, our brave leader, had ridden through to Grahamstown, hundreds
of miles distant, in order to represent the true facts of our case to
Governor Pottinger. He was unsuccessful, for he was obliged to return
without a hearing from the Governor, who excused himself under the
pretext that he had no time to receive Pretorius. When the latter
reached the Drakensberg, on his return, he found nearly the whole
population trekking over the mountains away from Natal and away from
British sway. His wife was lying ill in the waggon, and his daughter had
been severely hurt by the oxen which she was forced to lead.

[Sidenote: Suffering in Natal]

Sir Harry Smith, who succeeded Pottinger, thus described the condition
of the emigrant Boers:--"They were exposed to a state of misery which he
had never before seen equalled, except in Massena's invasion of
Portugal. The scene was truly heart-rending."

This is what we had to suffer at the hands of the British Government in
connection with Natal.

We trekked back over the Drakensberg to the Free State, where some
remained, but others wandered northwards over the Vaal River.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 9: Theal, pages 104--130.]

[Footnote 10: Theal, 169.]

[Footnote 11: Theal, 155.]

[Footnote 12: Theal, 179.]

[Footnote 13: Theal, 244.]




THE ORANGE FREE STATE.


[Sidenote: Boomplaats]

[14] Giving effect to Law 6 and 7, William IV., ch. 57, the English
appointed a Resident in the Free State. Pretorius, however, gave him 48
hours' notice to quit the Republic. Thereupon Sir Harry Smith mobilised
an army, chiefly consisting of blacks, against us white people, and
fought us at Boomplaats, on the 29th August, 1848. After an obstinate
struggle a Boer named Thomas Dreyer was caught by the blacks of Smith's
army, and to the shame of English reputation, was killed by the English
Governor for no other crime than that he was once, though years before,
a British subject, and had now dared to fight against Her Majesty's
Flag.

Another murder and deed of shame in South Africa's account with England!

[Sidenote: Annexation of the Orange Free State]

In the meantime Sir Harry Smith had annexed the Free State as the
"Orange River Sovereignty," on the pretext that four-fifths of the
inhabitants favoured British dominion, and were only intimidated by the
power of Pretorius from manifesting their wishes.

[Sidenote: Moshesh]

But the British Resident soon came into collision with Moshesh, the
great and crafty head chieftain of the Basutos.

The Boers were called up to assist, but only 75 responded out of the
1,000 who were called up. The English had then to eat the leek. The
Resident informed his Government that the fate of the Orange River
Sovereignty depended upon Andries Pretorius, the very man on whose head
Sir Harry Smith had put a price of £2,000. Earl Grey censured and
abandoned both Sir Harry Smith and the Resident, Major Warden, saying in
his despatch to the Governor dated 15th December, 1851, that the British
Government had annexed the country on the understanding that the
inhabitants had generally desired it. But if they would not support the
British Government, which had only been established in their interests,
and if they wished to be freed from that authority, there was no longer
any use in continuing it.

[Sidenote: The Orange Sovereignty once more a Republic.]

The Governor was clearly given to understand by the British Government
that there was in future to be no interference in any of the wars which
might take place between the different tribes and the inhabitants of
independent states beyond the Colonial boundaries, no matter how
sanguinary such wars might happen to be.

In other words, as Froude says, [15] "In 1852 we had discovered that wars
with the Natives and wars with the Dutch were expensive and useless,
that sending troops out and killing thousands of Natives was an odd way
of protecting them. We resolved then to keep within our own territories,
to meddle no more beyond the Orange River, and to leave the Dutch and
the Natives to settle their differences among themselves."

And again: [16] "Grown sick at last of enterprises which led neither to
honour nor peace, we resolved, in 1852, to leave Boers, Kaffirs,
Basutos, and Zulus to themselves, and make the Orange River the boundary
of British responsibilities. We made formal treaties with the two Dutch
States, binding ourselves to interfere no more between them and the
Natives, and to leave them either to establish themselves as a barrier
between ourselves and the interior of Africa, or to sink, as was
considered most likely, in an unequal struggle with warlike tribes, by
whom they were infinitely outnumbered."

The administration of the Free State cost the British taxpayer too much.
There was an idea, too, that if enough rope were given to the Boer he
would hang himself.

A new Governor, Sir George Cathcart, was sent out with two Special
Commissioners to give effect to the new policy. A new Treaty between
England and the Free State was signed, by which full independence was
guaranteed to the Republic, the British Government undertaking at the
same time not to interfere with any of the Native tribes north of the
Orange River.

As Cathcart remarked in his letters--the Sovereignty bubble had burst,
and the silly Sovereignty farce was played out.

[Sidenote: The Diamond Fields]

[17] It must not be forgotten that as long as the Free State was English
territory it was supposed to include that strip of ground now known as
Kimberley and the Diamond Fields; English title deeds had been issued
during the Orange River Sovereignty in respect of the ground in
question, which was considered to belong to the Sovereignty, and to be
under the jurisdiction of one of the Sovereignty Magistrates. At the
reestablishment of the Free State it consequently became a part of the
Orange Free State.

[Sidenote: The Basutos.]

Not fifteen years had elapsed since the Convention between England and
the Free State before it was broken by the English. It had been solemnly
stipulated that England would not interfere in Native affairs north of
the Orange River. The Basutos had murdered the Freestaters, plundered
them, ravished their wives, and committed endless acts of violence.
After a bitter struggle of three years, the Freestaters had succeeded in
inflicting a well-merited chastisement on the Basutos, when the British
intervened in 1869 in favour of the Natives, notwithstanding the fact
that they had reiterated their declaration of non-interference in the
Aliwal Convention.

[Sidenote: The Diamond Fields.]

[18] To return to the Diamond Fields, as Froude remarks: "The ink on the
Treaty of Aliwal was scarcely dry when diamonds were discovered in large
quantities in a district which we had ourselves treated as part of the
Orange Territory." Instead of honestly saying that the British
Government relied on its superior strength, and on this ground demanded
the territory in question, which contained the richest diamond fields in
the world, it hypocritically pretended that the real reason of its
depriving the Free State of the Diamond Fields was that they belonged to
a Native, notwithstanding the fact that this contention was falsified
by the judgment of the English Courts. [19] "There was a notion also,"
says Froude, "that the finest diamond mine in the world ought not to be
lost to the British Empire."

The ground was thereupon taken from the Boers, and "from that day no
Boer in South Africa has been able to trust to English promises."

Later, when Brand went to England, the British Government acknowledged
its guilt and paid £90,000 for the richest diamond fields in the world,
a sum which scarcely represents the daily output of the mines.

But notwithstanding the Free State Convention, notwithstanding the
renewed promises of the Aliwal Convention[20]--the Free State was forced
to suffer a third breach of the Convention at the hands of the English.
Ten thousand rifles were imported into Kimberley through the Cape
Colony, and sold there to the natives who encircled and menaced the two
Dutch Republics.[21] General Sir Arthur Cunynghame, the British
Commander-in-Chief in South Africa, admits that 400,000 guns were sold
to Kaffirs during his term of office. Protests from the Transvaal and
the Free State were of no avail.[22] And when the Free State in the
exercise of its just rights stopped waggons laden with guns on their way
through its territory, it was forced to pay compensation to the British
Government.

"The Free State," says the historian Froude, "paid the money, but paid
it under protest, with an old-fashioned appeal to the God of
Righteousness, whom, strange to say, they believed to be a reality."

It seems thus that there is no place for the God of Righteousness in
English policy.

So far we have considered our Exodus from the Cape Colony, and the way
in which we were deprived of Natal and the Free State by England. Now
for the case of the Transvaal.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 14: Theal, 256-64. Hofstede.]

[Footnote 15: _Oceana_, page 31.]

[Footnote 16: _Oceana_, page 36.]

[Footnote 17: Froude, _Oceana_. Hofstede.]

[Footnote 18: _Oceana_, page 41.]

[Footnote 19: _Oceana_, page 40.]

[Footnote 20: _Oceana_, page 42.]

[Footnote 21: Cunynghame, page XI.]

[Footnote 22: _Oceana_, page 42.]




THE SOUTH AFRICAN REPUBLIC.


The disastrous fate of the Trichardt Trek has already been told. The
Trichardts found the Transvaal overrun by the warriors of Moselikatse,
the King of the Matabele and father of Lobengula. The other tribes of
the Transvaal were his "dogs," according to the Kaffir term.

[Sidenote: Moselikatse.]

As soon as he heard of the approach of the emigrant Boers he sent out an
army to exterminate them. This army succeeded in cutting off and
murdering one or two stragglers, but it was defeated at Vechtkop by the
small laager of Sarel Celliers, where the Boer women distinguished
themselves by deeds of striking heroism.

Shortly afterwards the emigrant Boers journeyed across the Vaal River,
and after two battles drove Moselikatse and his hordes across the
Limpopo right into what is now Matabeleland. Andries Pretorius had come
into the Transvaal after the Annexation of Natal, and lived there
quietly, notwithstanding the price which had been put on his head after
Boomplaats. The British Resident in the Free State, which at this time
still belonged to England, was compelled to admit in a letter to the
English Governor that the fate of the Free State depended upon the
selfsame Pretorius. It was owing to his influence that Moshesh had not
killed off the English soldiers. People had decided in England--to quote
Froude once more--to abandon the Africanders and the Kaffirs beyond the
borders to their fate, in the hope that the Kaffirs would exterminate
the Africanders.

[Sidenote: The Sand River Convention.]

According to Molesworth, the English member of Parliament, the Colonial
Office was delighted when the Governor received a letter in 1851 from
Andries Pretorius, Commandant-General of the Transvaal Boers, in which
he offered on behalf of his people to enter into negotiations with the
British Government for a Treaty of Peace and Friendship. [23] The price
put on his head was promptly cancelled, and when Sir Harry Smith was
recalled in disgrace, Governor Cathcart was sent out to recognise the
independence of the Boers. The Aberdeen Ministry declared through its
representative in the House of Commons that they regretted having
crossed the Orange River, as the Boers were hostile to British rule, and
that Lord Grey had permitted it out of deference to the views of Sir
Harry Smith, against his own better judgment and convictions. This
policy was almost unanimously endorsed by the House of Commons.

The proposal of Pretorius was then accepted, and two Assistant
Commissioners, Hogge and Owen, were sent out with Governor Cathcart, and
met the Boer representatives at Sand River, a meeting which resulted in
the Sand River Convention, respectively signed by both the contracting
parties.

In this Convention, as in the later Free State Treaty, the Transvaal
Boers were guaranteed in the fullest way against interference or
hindrance on the part of Great Britain, either in regard to themselves
or the natives, to whom it was mutually agreed that the sale of firearms
and ammunition should be strictly forbidden. The British Commissioners
reported that the recognition of the independence of the Transvaal Boers
would secure great advantages, as it would ensure their friendship and
prevent any union with Moshesh. It would also be a guarantee against
slavery, and would provide for the extradition of criminals. [24] On the
13th May, 1852, great satisfaction was expressed by the Governor, Sir
George Cathcart, in his proclamation that one of the first acts of his
administration was to approve and fully confirm the Sand River
Convention. On the 24th June, 1852, the Colonial Secretary also
signified his approval of the Convention.

[Sidenote: Recognition of the South African Republic by Foreign Powers.]

The Republic was now in possession of a Convention, which from the
nature of its provisions seemed to promise a peaceful future. In
addition to Great Britain it was recognised in Holland, France, Germany,
Belgium, and especially in the United States of America. The American
Secretary of State at Washington, writing to President Pretorius on the
19th November, 1870, said:--"That his Government, while heartily
acknowledging the Sovereignty of the Transvaal Republic, would be ready
to take any steps which might be deemed necessary for that purpose."

But no reliance could be placed on England's word, even though it was
embodied in a Convention duly signed and ratified, for when the Diamond
Fields were discovered, barely seventeen years later, England claimed a
portion of Transvaal territory next to that part which had already been
wrested from the Free State. Arbitration was decided upon. As the
Arbitrators could not agree, the Umpire, Governor Keate, gave judgment
against the Transvaal. Thereupon it appeared that the English Arbitrator
had bought 12,000 morgen (of the ground in dispute) from the Native
Chief Waterboer for a mere song, and also that Governor Keate had
accepted Waterboer as a British subject, which was contrary to the
Convention. Even Dr. Moffat, who was no friend of the Boers, entered a
protest in a letter to the _Times_, on the ground that the territory in
question had all along been the property of the Transvaal.

[Sidenote: Sale of guns to Natives.]

But this was only one of the breaches of the Convention. When the
400,000 guns, about which Cunynghame and Moodie testify, were sold to
the Kaffirs, the Transvaal lodged a strong protest in 1872 with the Cape
High Commissioner. Their only satisfaction was an insolent reply from
Sir Henry Barkly.

[Sidenote: Annexation of the Transvaal.]

As a crowning act in these deeds of shame came the Annexation of the
Transvaal by Shepstone on the 12th April, 1877. Sir Bartle Frere was
sent out as Governor to Cape Town by Lord Carnarvon to carry out the
confederation policy of the latter. Shepstone was also sent to the
Transvaal to annex that State, in case the consent of the Volksraad or
that of the majority of the inhabitants could be obtained. The Volksraad
protested against the Annexation. The President protested. Out of a
possible 8,000 burghers, 6,800 protested. But all in vain.

Bishop Colenso declared that: [25] "The sly and underhand way in which
the Transvaal has been annexed appears to be unworthy of the English
name."

The Free State recorded its deepest regret at the Annexation.

Even Gladstone, in expressing his regret, admitted that England had in
the Transvaal acted in such a way as to use the free subjects of a
kingdom to oppress the free subjects of a Republic, and to compel them
to accept a citizenship which they did not wish to have.

But it was all of no avail.

Sir Garnet Wolseley declared: "As long as the sun shines the Transvaal
will remain British Territory." He also stated that the Vaal River would
flow backwards to its source over the Drakensberg before England would
give up the Transvaal.

[Sidenote: Pretexts for the Annexation.]

Shepstone's chief pretexts for the Annexation were that the Transvaal
could not subdue Secoecoeni, and that the Zulus threatened to overpower
the Transvaal. As far as Secoecoeni is concerned, he had shortly before
sued for peace, and the Transvaal Republic had fined him 2,000 head of
cattle. With regard to the Zulus, the threatened danger was never felt
by the Republic. Four hundred burghers had crushed the Zulu power in
1838, and the burghers had crowned Panda, Cetewayo's father, in 1840.

Sir Bartle Frere acknowledged in a letter to Sir Robert Herbert dated
12th January, 1879, that he could not understand how it was that the
Zulus had left Natal unmolested for so long, until he found out that
the Zulus had been thoroughly subdued by the Boers during Dingaan's
time. Just before the Annexation a small patrol of Boers had pursued the
Chief Umbeline into the very heart of Zululand. But Bishop Colenso
points out clearly what a fraudulent stalking horse the Zulu difficulty
was. There had been a dispute of some years standing between the
Transvaal and the Zulus about a strip of territory along the border,
which had been claimed and occupied by the Boers since 1869. The
question was referred to Shepstone before the Annexation, while he was
still in Natal, and he gave a direct decision against the Boers, and in
favour of the Zulus. There was thus no cause on that account for the
fear of a Zulu attack upon the Transvaal. But scarcely had Shepstone
become administrator of the Transvaal when he declared the ground in
dispute to be British territory, and discovered that there was the
strongest evidence for the contention of the Boers that the Zulus had no
right to the ground. Bulwer, the Governor of Natal, appointed a Boundary
Commission, which decided in favour of the Zulus, but Shepstone
vehemently opposed their verdict, and Bartle Frere and the High
Commissioner (Wolseley) followed him blindly.[26] The result was that
England sent an ultimatum to the Zulus, and the Zulu War took place,
which lowered the prestige of England among the Natives of South Africa.

It will thus be seen that Shepstone's two chief reasons for the
Annexation were devoid of foundation.

It was naturally difficult for the Secretary of State to justify his
instructions that the Annexation of the Transvaal was only to take
place in case a majority of the inhabitants favoured such a course, in
face of the fact that 6,800 out of 8,000 burghers had protested against
it.

But both Shepstone and Lord Carnarvon declared without a shadow of proof
that the signatures of the protesting petitions were obtained under
threats of violence. The case, indeed, was exactly the reverse. When the
meeting was held at Pretoria to sign this petition, Shepstone caused the
cannons to be pointed at the assemblage. As if this were not enough, he
issued a menacing proclamation against the signing of the petition.

When these pretexts were thus disposed of, they relied on the fact that
the Annexation was a _fait accompli_.

Delegates were sent to England to protest against the Annexation, but
Lord Carnarvon told them that he would only be misleading them if he
held out any hope of restitution. Gladstone afterwards endorsed this by
saying that he could not advise the Queen to withdraw her Sovereignty
from the Transvaal.

When it was represented that the Annexation was a deliberate breach of
the Sand River Convention, Sir Bartle Frere replied, in 1879, that if
they wished to go back to the Sand River Convention, they might just as
well go back to the Creation!

It is necessary here not to lose sight of the fact that the ground,
which according to the Keate award in 1870 had been declared to lie
beyond the borders of the Republic, was now included by Shepstone as
being a part of the Transvaal.

There were, however, other matters which under Republican
administration were branded as wrong, but which under English rule were
perfectly right. In the Secoecoeni War under the Republic the British
High Commissioner had protested against the use of the Swazies and
Volunteers by the Republic in conducting the campaign.

Under British administration the war was carried on at first by regulars
only, but when these were defeated by the Kaffirs, an army of Swazies,
as well as Volunteers, was collected. The number of the former can be
gathered from the fact that 500 Swazies were killed. The atrocities
committed by these Swazi allies of the English on the people of
Secoecoeni's tribe were truly awful.

Bishop Colenso, who condemned this incident, said, with regard to the
results of the Annexation of the Republic, that the Zululand difficulty,
as well as that with Secoecoeni, was the direct consequence of the
unfortunate Annexation of the Transvaal, which would not have happened
if we had not taken possession of the country like a lot of freebooters,
partly by "trickery," partly by "bullying." Elsewhere he said: "And in
this way we annexed the Transvaal, and that act brought as its Nemesis
the Zulu difficulty."

That the British Government had all along considered the Zulus as a
means of annihilating the Transvaal when a favourable opportunity
occurred, is clear from a letter which the High Commissioner, Sir Bartle
Frere, wrote to General Ponsonby, in which he says:--[27] "That while
the Boer Republic was a rival and semi-hostile power, it was a Natal
weakness rather to pet the Zulus as one might a tame wolf who only
devoured one's neighbours' sheep. We always remonstrated, but rather
feebly, and now that both flocks belong to us, we are rather embarrassed
in stopping the wolfs ravages."

And again in a letter to Sir Robert Herbert:--[28] "The Boers were
aggressive, the English were not; and were well inclined to help the
Zulus against the Boers. I have been shocked to find how very close to
the wind the predecessors of the present Government here have sailed in
supporting the Zulus against Boer aggression. Mr. John Dunn, still a
salaried official of this Government, thinking himself bound to explain
his own share in supplying rifles to the Zulus in consequence of the
revelations in a late trial of a Durban gun-runner, avows that he did so
with the knowledge, if not the consent, and at the suggestion of (naming
a high Colonial official) in Natal. There can be no doubt that Natal
sympathy was strongly with the Zulus as against the Boers, and, what is
worse, is so still."

Under such circumstances did the Annexation take place. The English did
not scruple to make use of Kaffir aid against the Boers, as at
Boomplaats, and it was brought home in every possible way to the British
Nation that a great wrong had been committed here; but even the High
Commissioner, though he heard the words issue from our bleeding hearts,
wished that he had brought some artillery in order to disperse us, and
misrepresented us beyond measure.

Full of hope we said to ourselves if only the Queen of England and the
English people knew that in the Transvaal a people were being oppressed,
they would never suffer it.

[Sidenote: The War of Freedom.]

But we had now to admit that it was of no use appealing to England,
because there was no one to hear us. Trusting in the Almighty God of
righteousness and justice, we armed ourselves for an apparently hopeless
struggle in the firm conviction that whether we conquered or whether we
died, the sun of freedom in South Africa would arise out of the morning
mists. With God's all-powerful aid we gained the victory, and for a time
at least it seemed as if our liberty was secure.

At Bronkorst Spruit, at Laing's Nek, at Ingogo, and at Majuba, God gave
us victory, although in each case the British troopers outnumbered us,
and were more powerfully armed than ourselves.

After these victories had given new force to our arguments, the British
Government, under the leadership of Gladstone, a man whom we shall never
forget, decided to cancel the Annexation, and to restore to us our
violated rights.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 23: Molesworth.]

[Footnote 24: Theal, 305.]

[Footnote 25: 30th April, 1877, Letter to the Rev. La Touche.]

[Footnote 26: Martineau, _The Transvaal Trouble_, page 76.]

[Footnote 27: Martineau, _The Transvaal Trouble_, page 69.]

[Footnote 28: _The Transvaal Trouble_, page 76.]




CONVENTIONS OF 1881 AND 1884.


[Sidenote: Pretoria Convention.]

An ordinary person would have thought that the only upright way of
carrying a policy of restitution into effect would have been for the
British Government to have returned to the provisions of the Sand River
Convention. If the Annexation was wrong in itself--without taking the
Boer victories into consideration--then it ought to have been abolished
with all its consequences, and there ought to have been a _restitutio in
integrum_ of that Republic; that is to say, the Boers ought to have been
placed in exactly the same position as they were in before the
Annexation. But what happened? With a magnanimity which the English
press and English orators are never tired of vaunting, they gave us back
our country, but the violation of the Sand River Convention remained
unredressed. Instead of a sovereign freedom, we obtained free internal
administration, subject to the suzerain power of Her Majesty over the
Republic. This occurred by virtue of the Convention of Pretoria, the
preamble of which bestowed self-government on the Transvaal State with
the express reservation of suzerainty. The articles of that Convention
endeavoured to establish a _modus vivendi_ between such self-government
and the aforesaid suzerainty. Under this bi-lateral arrangement the
Republic was governed for three years by two heterogeneous
principles--that of representative self-government, and that
represented by the British Agent. This system was naturally unworkable;
it was also clear that the arrangement of 1881 was not to be considered
as final.

[Sidenote: The London Convention.]

The suzerainty was above all an absurdity which was not possible to
reconcile with practical efficacy. So with the approval of the British
Government a Deputation went to London in 1883, in order to get the
status of the Republic altered, and to substitute a new Convention for
that of Pretoria. The Deputation proposed to return to the position as
laid down by the Sand River Convention, and that was in fact the only
upright and statesmanlike arrangement possible. But according to the
evidence of one of the witnesses on the British side, the Rev. D.P.
Faure, the Ministry suffered from a very unwholesome dread of
Parliament; so it would not agree to this, and submitted a counter
proposal (see Appendix A.), which eventually was accepted by the
Deputation, and the conditions of which are to-day of the greatest
importance to us.

This Draft was constructed out of the Pretoria Convention with such
alterations as were designed to make it acceptable to the Deputation.
The preamble under which complete self-government, subject to the
suzerainty, was granted to the Republic was deliberately erased by Lord
Derby, then Secretary of State for the Colonies, so that the suzerainty
naturally lapsed when the Draft was eventually accepted. In order to
make it perfectly clear that the status of the Republic was put upon
another basis, the title "Transvaal State" was altered to that of the
"South African Republic." All articles in the Pretoria Convention which
gave the British Government any authority in the internal affairs of
this Republic were done away with. As far as foreign affairs were
concerned, a great and far-reaching change was made. It was stipulated
in Article 2 of the Pretoria Convention that "Her Majesty reserves to
herself, her heirs and successors (_a_), the right from time to time to
appoint a British Resident in and for the said State, with such duties
and functions as are hereinafter defined; (_b_), the right to move
troops through the said State in time of war or in case of the
apprehension of immediate war between the Suzerain Power and any Foreign
State or Native tribe in South Africa; and (_c_) the control of the
external relations of the said State, including the conclusion of
treaties and the conduct of diplomatic intercourse with Foreign Powers,
such intercourse to be carried on through Her Majesty's diplomatic and
consular officers abroad."

This was superseded by Article 4 of the Convention of London, which was
to the following effect:--

     "The South African Republic will conclude no treaty or engagement
     with any State or Nation other than the Orange Free State, nor
     with any Native tribe to the eastward or westward of the
     Republic, until the same has been approved by Her Majesty the
     Queen.

     "Such approval shall be considered to have been granted if Her
     Majesty's Government shall not, within six months after receiving
     a copy of such treaty (which shall be delivered to them
     immediately upon its completion), have notified that the
     conclusion of such treaty is in conflict with the interests of
     Great Britain, or any of Her Majesty's possessions in South
     Africa."

The right of the British Government to exercise control over all our
foreign relations, and to conduct all our diplomatic negotiations
through its own Agent, was thus replaced by the far more slender right
of approving or disapproving of our treaties and conventions _after they
were completed_, and then only when it affected the interests of Great
Britain or Her Majesty's possessions in South Africa.

[Sidenote: Status of the Republic.]

It was this Article 4 which gave an appearance of truth (and an
appearance only) to Lord Derby's declaration in the House of Lords that
although he had omitted the term of suzerainty, the substance thereof
remained. It would have been more correct to have said that owing to the
lapse of suzerainty the South African Republic no longer fell under the
head of a semi-suzerain State, but that it had become a free,
independent, sovereign international State, the sovereignty of which was
only limited by the restriction contained in Article 4 of the
Convention. Sovereignty need not of necessity be absolute. Belgium is a
sovereign international State, although it is bound to observe a
condition of permanent neutrality. The South African Republic falls
undoubtedly under this category of States, the sovereignty of which is
limited in one or other defined direction. But the fact of its
sovereignty is nevertheless irrefutable. It will be pointed out later
how this position, which is undoubtedly the correct one, has been
consistently upheld by the Government of the South African Republic, but
it is necessary now to revert to the historical development.




CAPITALISTIC JINGOISM.

FIRST PERIOD.


[Sidenote: The gold fields.]

In 1886 gold was discovered in great quantities and in different parts
of the South African Republic, and with that discovery our people
entered upon a new phase of their history. The South African Republic
was to develope within a few years from a condition of great poverty
into a rich and prosperous State, a country calculated in every respect
to awaken and inflame the greed of the Capitalistic speculator. Within a
few years the South African Republic was ranked among the first
gold-producing countries of the world. The bare veldt of hitherto was
overspread with large townships inhabited by a speculative and bustling
class brought together from all corners of the earth. The Boers, who had
hitherto followed pastoral and hunting pursuits, were now called upon to
fulfil one of the most difficult tasks in the world, namely, the
management of a complicated administration, and the government of a
large digging population, which had sprung up suddenly under the most
extraordinary circumstances. And how have they acquitted themselves of
the task? We quote the following from a brilliant pamphlet by Olive
Schreiner, who possesses a deeper insight into the true condition of
affairs in South Africa than has been vouchsafed to any other writer on
the same subject:--

     [29] "We put it to all generous and just spirits, whether of statesmen
     or thinkers, whether the little Republic does not deserve our
     sympathy, which wise minds give to all who have to deal with new
     and complex problems, where the past experience of humanity has
     not marked out a path--and whether, if we touch the subject at
     all, it is not necessary that it should be in that large
     impartial, truth-seeking spirit in which humanity demands we
     should approach all great social difficulties and questions?"

     "It is sometimes said that when one stands looking down from the
     edge of this hill at the great mining camp of Johannesburg
     stretching beneath, with its heaps of white sand and _débris_
     mountain high, its mining chimneys belching forth smoke, with its
     seventy thousand Kaffirs and its eighty thousand men and women,
     white or coloured, of all nationalities, gathered here in the
     space of a few years on the spot where, fifteen years ago, the
     Boer's son guided his sheep to the water and the Boer's wife sat
     alone at evening at the house door to watch the sunset, we are
     looking upon one of the most wonderful spectacles on earth. And
     it is wonderful; but as we look at it the thought always arises
     within us of something more wonderful yet--the marvellous manner
     in which a little nation of simple folk, living in peace in the
     land they loved, far from the rush of cities and the concourse of
     men, have risen to the difficulties of their condition; how they,
     without instruction in statecraft or traditionary rules of
     policy, have risen to face their great difficulties, and have
     sincerely endeavoured to meet them in a large spirit, and have
     largely succeeded. Nothing but that curious and wonderful
     instinct for statecraft and the organisation and arrangement of
     new social conditions which seem inherent as a gift of the blood
     to all those peoples who took their rise in the little deltas on
     the north-east of the Continent of Europe where the English and
     Dutch peoples alike took their rise could have made it possible.
     We do not say that the Transvaal Republic has among its guides
     and rulers a Solon or a Lycurgus, but it has to-day, among the
     men guiding its destiny, men of brave and earnest spirit, who are
     seeking manfully and profoundly to deal with the great problems
     before them in a wide spirit of humanity and justice. And we do
     again repeat that the strong sympathy of all earnest and
     thoughtful minds, not only in Africa, but in England, should be
     with them."

If one compares the gold fields of the Witwatersrand with those of other
countries, it is certain that the former can claim to be the best
governed mining area in the world. This is the almost unanimous verdict
of people who have had a lengthy experience of the gold fields of
California, Australia, and Klondyke.

As far as South Africa is concerned, it is only necessary to instance
the diamond fields of Griqualand West when they were directly
administered by the British Government. They then afforded a continual
spectacle of rebellion, rioting, and indescribable uncertainty of, and
danger to, life and property.

In Appendix B. are certain extracts from the evidence of eye witnesses
as to the chaos which characterised the condition of the diamond fields
when under British rule--a condition which differs from that of the
Witwatersrand gold fields as night from day. Reference will be made
later on to the administration of the gold fields of the South African
Republic. For the present it is necessary to glance at certain forces
which had been developed on the diamond fields of the Cape Colony, and
which have introduced a new factor of overwhelming importance into the
South African situation.

[Sidenote: Capitalism.]

The development of British policy in South Africa had hitherto been
influenced at different times, and in a greater or less degree, by the
spirit of Jingoism, and by that zeal for Annexation which is so
characteristic of the trading instincts of the race. It was, however, a
policy that had been conducted in other respects on continuous lines,
and it might be justified by the argument that it was necessary in the
interests of the Empire. But Capitalism was the new factor which was
about to play such an important _rôle_ in the history of South Africa.
The natural differences in men find their highest expression in the
varieties of influence which one man exercises over another; this
influence can either be of a religious, moral, political, or purely
material nature. Material influence generally takes the form of money,
or the financial nexus, as an English writer has termed it. An unusual
combination of this form of influence leads to Capitalism just as an
unusual combination of political influence leads to tyranny, and an
unusual combination of religious influence to hierarchical despotism.
Capitalism is the modern peril which threatens to become as dangerous to
mankind as the political tyranny of the old Eastern world and the
religious despotism of the Middle Ages were in their respective eras.

In a part of the world so rich in minerals of all descriptions as the
Transvaal, it is natural that Capitalism should play a considerable
_rôle_. Unfortunately, in South Africa it has from the very first
attempted to go far beyond its legitimate scope; it has endeavoured to
gain political power, and to make all other forms of government and
influence subservient to its own ends. The measure of its success can be
clearly gauged by the fact that all South Africa is standing to-day on
the brink of a great precipice, and may be hurled into the abyss before
the ink on these pages is dry.

[Sidenote: Mr. Cecil Rhodes]

The spirit of Capitalism found its incarnation in Mr. Cecil Rhodes, who
was able to amalgamate the pressing and conflicting interests of the
Diamond Fields into the one great Corporation of which he is the head.

Although he probably had no exceptional aptitude for politics, he was
irresistibly drawn towards them by the stress of his interests. By means
of his financial influence, together with a double allowance of
elasticity of conscience, he succeeded so far as to become Prime
Minister of the Cape Colony, and was powerfully and solidly supported by
the Africander party. The Africanders believed in him because they were
really and deeply imbued with the necessity of the co-operation and
fusion of the two white races in South Africa, and he, as a loyal
Englishman, but fully possessing the confidence of Colonial
Africanderdom, seemed to them just the very person to realise their
ideal.

To a careful observer the alliance between Africanderdom and Capitalism
was bound to lead to a rupture sooner or later. Deeply rooted and pure
national sentiment as well as burning conviction form the basis of
Africander Policy, and it was obvious that in the long run it would be
discovered that this policy could never be made subservient to purely
financial interests.

[Sidenote: Jingoism.]

But there was another factor. There was that debased form of patriotism
called Jingoism. It is a form of party politics without solid
convictions or real beliefs, which puffs itself out with big words, and
with the froth of high-sounding ideas and principles. It is a policy,
nevertheless, which appeals most strongly to the instincts of
self-interest and to the illegal appropriation of other people's
property. It revels in the lust of boasting, so deeply ingrained in
human nature. In a word, it is a policy which is in direct opposition to
the true spirit of religion, to the altruistic ideals of humanity, and
to that sentiment of humility and moderation which is the natural basis
of all morality.

[Sidenote: Alliance between Capitalism and Jingoism.]

Here, indeed, were the elements of an enduring alliance--an alliance
between Capitalism, with its great material influence, but barren of any
one single exalted idea or principle on the one hand, and Jingoism,
sterile, empty, soulless, but with a rich stock-in-trade of bombastic
ideas and principles, prompted by the most selfish aspirations, on the
other hand.

The one was eminently calculated to form the complement of the other,
thus creating a natural alliance which is rapidly becoming a menace, all
the world over, to the best and most enduring interests of humanity.

This Capitalistic Jingoism is the tree from which it is the lot of our
unfortunate South Africa to gather such bitter fruit to-day.

Mr. Rhodes, with that treacherous duplicity which is an enduring
characteristic of British policy in South Africa, co-operated publicly,
and in the closest relationship, with the Colonial Africanders, while he
was secretly fomenting a conspiracy with Jingoism against the Cape
Africanders and the South African Republics. He already had the
Africanders in the Cape Colony under his sway; his aim was now to gain
the same influence in the South African Republic, with its rich gold
mines--not so much, perhaps, for himself personally as for Capitalism,
with which his interests were so closely identified. In case of success,
he would obtain his personal aim, and Capitalism would be absolutely
despotic in South Africa. With an eye to this end he, with other
Capitalists, began in 1892 to foment a political agitation in
Johannesburg against the Republic. In a place like Johannesburg, where
drink is consumed in great quantities, and where the high altitude and
the stress of business all tend to keep people's spirits in a constant
state of excitability, it was easy enough, with the aid of money, to
bring about a state of political ferment in a very short time,
especially as just that measure of grievances existed to give a colour
of truth to the imaginary ones.

[Sidenote: The National Union.]

Under these conditions the National Union movement originated in 1892.
Its adherents were entirely composed of the creatures and parasites of
the Capitalists, with a few honest fools and enthusiasts who naturally
did not think deeply enough to discern the aim and the trend of this
hypocritical movement.

The Capitalists at this time certainly kept well in the background, in
order that the movement might have the appearance of being a popular
one. The Capitalists of Johannesburg were, however, a theatrical lot,
and the desire to play a prominent _rôle_ was too intense to be
suppressed for any length of time, so that after the lapse of a couple
of years they naturally took the leading part in the _opera bouffe_
agitation which followed.

[Sidenote: Corruption of the Capitalists.]

They began, by means of the lowest and most repulsive methods, to
undermine the Boer policy in order to gain the mastery of the mining
legislation and administration. They had persuaded themselves and the
rest of the world that the Boers were as a body corrupt and tainted, so
they armed themselves, with the power of money in order to overthrow
them.

Lionel Phillips wrote in this spirit on the 16th June, 1894, to Beit in
London:--[30] "I may here say that, as you of course know, I have no
desire for political rights, and believe as a whole that the community
is not ambitious in this respect. The bewaarplaatsen question will, I
think, be settled in our favour, but at a cost of about £25,000. It is
proposed to spend a good deal of money in order to secure a better
Raad, but it must be remembered that the spending of money on elections
has, by recent legislation, been made a criminal offence, and the matter
will have to be carefully handled."

On the 15th July, 1894, he wrote again to the same
correspondent:--[31] "Our trump card is a fund of £10--15,000 to improve
the Raad. Unfortunately the companies have no secret service fund. I
must divine away. We don't want to shell out ourselves."

Here we catch a glimpse behind the scenes, and we observe how the
Capitalists in 1894 had already endeavoured to lower and vitiate our
public life by methods which did not even recoil before the criminal law
of the land, to say nothing of elementary morality.

And did they succeed? Were the people and the Volksraad as corrupt as
they thought, and as they still endeavour to make the world believe?
Their failure is the best and most complete answer to this calumny.

If corruption on a large scale, however, failed to ensure the triumph of
Capitalism over the community, the other trump card of Jingoism still
remained. The pulse of the High Commissioner was felt by Mr. Lionel
Phillips, and what was the answer of Sir Henry Loch, Her Majesty's
representative in South Africa? We extract from the same secret letter
book from which we have already quoted the following letter, dated 1st
July, addressed to Wernher, a member of the influential firm of Wernher,
Beit & Co.:--

[Sidenote: (Sir) Henry Loch's indiscretion.]

[32] "Sir Henry Loch (with whom I had two long private interviews alone)
asked me some very pointed questions, such as what arms we had in
Johannesburg, whether the population could hold the place for six days
until help could arrive, etc., etc., and stated plainly that if there
had been three thousand rifles and ammunition here he would certainly
have come over."

And so on in the same strain. Sir Henry Loch endorsed the truth of these
statements two years later by boasting openly in the House of Lords
about his plans for organising a raid into the South African Republic.

And all this happened while he (Sir Henry Loch) was the guest of our
Government, and engaged in friendly negotiations about the interests of
British subjects. To what a depth had British Policy in South Africa
already degenerated. Within two years, however, a deeper abyss was to
open.

[Sidenote: The conspiracy.]

The secret conspiracy of the Capitalists and Jingoes to overthrow the
South African Republic began now to gain ground with great rapidity, for
just at this critical period Mr. Chamberlain became Secretary of State
for the Colonies. In the secret correspondence of the conspirators,
reference is continually made to the Colonial Office in a manner which,
taken in connection with later revelations and with a successful
suppression of the truth, has deepened the impression over the whole
world that the Colonial Office was privy to, if not an accomplice in,
the villainous attack on the South African Republic.

[Sidenote: The Jameson Raid]

It is unnecessary to dwell at length on the Jameson Raid; the world has
not yet forgotten how the Administrators of a British province, carrying
out a conspiracy headed by the Prime Minister of the Cape Colony,
attacked the South African Republic with an armed band in order to
assist the Capitalist revolution of Johannesburg in overthrowing the
Boer Government; how this raid and this revolution were upset by the
vigilance of the Boers; how Jameson and his filibusters were handed over
to England to stand their trial--although the Boers had the power and
the right to shoot them down as robbers; how the whole gang of
Johannesburg Capitalists pleaded guilty to treason and sedition; how,
instead of confiscating all their property, and thus dealing a death
blow to Capitalistic influence in South Africa, the Government dealt
most leniently with them (an act of magnanimity which was rewarded by
their aiding and abetting a still more dangerous agitation three years
later).

[Sidenote: The Parliamentary Commission.]

Nor has the world forgotten how, at the urgent instance of the
Africander party in the Cape Colony, an investigation into the causes of
the conflict was held in Westminster; how that investigation degenerated
into a low attack upon the Government of the sorely maligned and deeply
injured South African Republic, and how at the last moment, when the
truth was on the point of being revealed, and the conspiracy traced to
its fountain head in the British Cabinet, the Commission decided all of
a sudden not to make certain compromising documents public.

[Sidenote: "Constitutional means."]

Here we see to what a depth the old great traditions of British
Constitutionalism had sunk under the influence of the ever-increasing
and all-absorbing lust of gold, and in the hands of a sharp-witted
wholesale dealer, who, like Cleon of old, has constituted himself a
statesman. Treachery and violence not having been able to attain their
objects, "Constitutional means" were to be invoked (as Mr. Rhodes openly
boasted before the aforesaid Commission), so as to make Capitalistic
Jingoism master of the situation in South Africa.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 29: Olive Schreiner, _Words in Season_, page 62.]

[Footnote 30: Transvaal Green Book No. 1 of 1896.]

[Footnote 31: Transvaal Green Book No. 1 of 1896.]

[Footnote 32: Transvaal Green Book No. 1 of 1896.]




CAPITALISTIC JINGOISM.

SECOND PERIOD.


[Sidenote: National sentiment in South Africa kindled by the Jameson
Raid.]

The foregoing sketch has shown how deeply our people felt and resented
the wrong that was done to them. It was to be expected that such a
treacherous attack on the Republics, emanating from their own leader,
would awaken the Africanders even in the remotest districts, and would
bring fresh energy into the arena of politics. To give an instance of
the measure of the feeling which had been quickened by the raid, a short
extract is given below from an article published in the organ of the
Africander party, _Our Land_, a few months after the Raid, an article
which undoubtedly expressed the feeling of Africanders:--

"Has not Providence over-ruled and guided the painful course of events
in South Africa since the beginning of this year (1896)? Who can doubt
it?

"The stab which was intended to paralyse Africanderdom once and for all
in the Republics has sent an electric thrill direct to the national
heart. Africanderdom has awakened to a sense of earnestness and
consciousness which we have not observed since the heroic war for
Liberty in 1881. From the Limpopo as far as Cape Town the Second Majuba
has given birth to a new inspiration and a new movement amongst our
people in South Africa. A new feeling has rushed in huge billows over
South Africa. The flaccid and cowardly Imperialism, that had already
begun to dilute and weaken our national blood, gradually turned aside
before the new current which permeated our people. Many who, tired of
the slow development of the national idea, had resigned themselves to
Imperialism now paused and asked themselves what Imperialism had
produced in South Africa? Bitterness and race hatred it is true! Since
the days of Sir Harry Smith and Theophilus Shepstone and Bartle Frere to
the days of Leander Jameson and Cecil Rhodes, Imperialism in South
Africa has gone hand in hand with bloodshed and fraud. However wholesome
the effects of Imperialism may be elsewhere, its continual tendency in
this country during all these years has been nothing else but an attempt
to force our national life and national character into foreign grooves;
and to seal this pressure with blood and tears.... This is truly a
critical moment in the existence of Africanderdom all over South Africa.
Now or never! Now or never the foundation of a wide-embracing
nationalism must be laid. The Iron is red hot, and the time for forging
is at hand....

... The partition wall has disappeared. Let us stand manfully by one
another. The danger has not yet disappeared; on the contrary, never has
the necessity for a policy of a Colonial and Republican Union been
greater; now the psychological moment has arrived; now our people have
awakened all over South Africa; a new glow illuminates our hearts; let
us now lay the foundation stone of a real United South Africa on the
soil of a pure and _all-comprehensive national sentiment_."

Such language caused the Jingoes to shudder--not because it was
disloyal, because that it certainly was _not_, but because it proved
that the Jameson Raid had suddenly awakened the Africanders, and that
owing to this defeat of the Jingoes a vista of further and greater
defeats widened out in the future. The Colonial Africanders would
certainly have to be reckoned with, in case an annexation policy were
followed with regard to the Republics.

[Sidenote: Victory of the Africander Party in the Cape Parliament.]

For some time the Jingoes cherished the hope that they would gain the
majority in the Cape Parliament under an amended Redistribution Act. The
General Election of 1898 took place, with the result that the Africander
party obtained a small majority, and later, under a Redistribution Act
forced upon them by the Jingoes, the majority of the former was
considerably increased.

[Sidenote: The cry of disloyalty]

Instead of honestly admitting that the Africander victory was the
natural result of the Jameson Raid, the Jingoes began, not only in South
Africa, but also in England, to shout that the rule and supremacy of
England in South Africa was menaced.

[Sidenote: The Transvaal must be humiliated.]

They contended that South Africa would be lost to England unless
energetic intervention took place without delay, and that this menace to
English rule was due to the Republican propaganda which the South
African Republic had set in motion. That as long as the South African
Republic refused to humiliate itself before British authority, but on
the contrary kept its youthful head on high with national pride, other
parts of South Africa would be inclined to follow its example, and there
would thus be no certainty for British supremacy in this quarter of the
globe. The South African Republic would have to be humiliated and to be
crushed into the dust; the Africanders in other parts of South Africa
would then abandon their alleged hope of a more extensive Republican
South Africa.

[Sidenote: The necessity for constitutional means.]

But how was this humiliation to be brought about, and how, above all,
was it to be brought about by those "Constitutional means," which, since
the failure of the conspiracy, had become a _sine qua non_?

The new Governor of the Cape Colony and High Commissioner of South
Africa, who had enjoyed the distinction of a brilliant university
career, who had learnt humility and moderation at the feet of Mr. W.T.
Stead, and who had learnt by his experience with the fellaheen in Egypt
how to govern the descendants of the Huguenots and the "Beggars of the
Sea," would know very well how to evolve "Constitutional means" in order
to humiliate the South African Republic, and to crush it into the dust.

[Sidenote: The suzerainty.]

There was at any rate the burning question of suzerainty, which the
South African Republic had unconsciously and innocently raised in the
following way:--

After the Jameson Raid the Volksraad had passed certain laws with a view
of removing some of the causes of that movement, as, for example, the
law by which dangerous individuals could be expelled from the State, and
the law by which paupers and people suffering from contagious diseases
could be prevented from entering the Republic.[33] These laws were
declared to be in conflict with Article XIV. of the London Convention.
Violations of Article IV. were also said to have taken place in regard
to certain extradition and other treaties, which had been concluded
between the South African Republic and Foreign Powers.[34] On the 7th
May, 1897, the Government of the South African Republic dispatched a
very important reply to these accusations, in which, after fully stating
the reasons why the Government differed from Her Majesty's Government,
an appeal was made for arbitration as being the most suitable method of
settling the dispute.

This appeal was couched in the following language:

[Sidenote: The appeal for Arbitration.]

[35] "While it respects the opinion of Her British Majesty's Government,
it takes the liberty, with full confidence in the correctness of its own
views, to propose to Her British Majesty's Government the principle of
Arbitration, with which the honourable the First Volksraad agreed, in
the hope that it will be taken in the conciliatory spirit in which it is
made. It considers that it has every reason for this proposal, the more
so because the principle of Arbitration is already laid down in that
Convention in the only case in which, according to its opinion at the
time, a difference could be foreseen, to wit, with regard to Article I.;
because it has already been proposed by Her British Majesty's
Government, and accepted by this Government with regard to the
difference in respect of Article 14 of the Convention arising in the
matter of the so-called Coolie question, which was settled by
Arbitration; because the Right Honourable the Secretary of State, Mr.
Chamberlain, himself, in his letter of the 4th September, 1895, to His
Excellency the High Commissioner at Cape Town, favours this principle in
the same question, where he says: 'After 1886, as time went on, the
manner in which the law was interpreted and was worked, or was proposed
to be worked, gave rise to complaints on the part of the British
Government, and as it seemed impossible to come to an agreement by means
of correspondence, the Marquis of Ripon took what is the approved course
in such cases, of proposing to the South African Republic that the
dispute should be referred to Arbitration. This was agreed to ...,'
because the principle of Arbitration in matters such as this appears to
the Government to be the most impartial, just, and most satisfactory way
out of the existing difficulty, and, lastly, because one of the parties
to a Convention, according to all principles of reasonableness, cannot
expect that his interpretation will be respected by the other party as
the only valid and correct one. And although this Government is firmly
convinced that a just and impartial decision might be obtained even
better in South Africa than anywhere else, it wishes, in view of the
conflicting elements, interests, and aspirations which are now apparent
in South Africa, and in order to avoid even the appearance that it would
be able or desire to exercise influence in order to obtain a decision
favourable to it, to propose that the President of the Swiss Bondstate,
who may be reckoned upon as standing altogether outside the question,
and to feel sympathy or antipathy neither for the one party nor for the
other, be requested to point out a competent jurist, as has already
often been done in respect of international disputes. The Government
would have no objection that the Arbitration be subject to a limitation
of time, and gives the assurance now already that it will willingly
subject itself to any decision if such should, contrary to its
expectation, be given against it. The Government repeats the well-meant
wish that this proposal may find favour with Her British Majesty's
Government; and inasmuch as the allegations of breaches of the
Convention find entrance now even in South Africa, and bring and keep
the feelings more and more in a state of suspense, this Government will
be pleased if it can learn the decision of Her British Majesty's
Government as soon as possible."

[Sidenote: England refuses to arbitrate on ground of suzerainty.]

To this the British Government replied that according to the Convention
of 1884, taken in conjunction with the preamble of the Convention of
1881, the South African Republic was under the suzerainty of Her
Majesty, and that it was incompatible with the subordinate position of
the South African Republic to submit to Arbitration any matters in
dispute as to the construction of the Convention between it and the
suzerain Power.

In order to avoid any misunderstanding as to this very remarkable
document, the exact wording of the British dispatch is
given:--[36] "Finally, the Government of the South African Republic
propose that all points in dispute between Her Majesty's Government and
themselves relating to the Convention should be referred to Arbitration,
the Arbitrator to be nominated by the President of the Swiss Republic.
In making this proposal the Government of the South African Republic
appear to have overlooked the distinction between the Conventions of
1881 and 1884 and an ordinary treaty between two independent Powers,
questions arising upon which may properly be the subject of Arbitration.
By the Pretoria Convention of 1881 Her Majesty, as Sovereign of the
Transvaal Territory, accorded to the inhabitants of that territory
complete self-government, subject to the suzerainty of Her Majesty, her
heirs, and successors, upon certain terms and conditions, and subject to
certain reservations and limitations set forth in 33 articles; and by
the London Convention of 1884, Her Majesty, while maintaining the
preamble of the earlier instrument, directed and declared that certain
other articles embodied therein should be substituted for the articles
embodied in the Convention of 1881. The articles of the Convention of
1881 were accepted by the Volksraad of the Transvaal State, and those of
the Convention of 1884 by the Volksraad of the South African Republic.
Under these Conventions, therefore, Her Majesty holds towards the South
African Republic the relation of a _suzerain_ who has accorded to the
people of that Republic self-government upon certain conditions, _and it
would be incompatible with that position to submit to Arbitration the
construction of the conditions on which she accorded self-government to
the Republic_."

[Sidenote: Reply of the Transvaal Government.]

[37] In its celebrated reply of the 16th April, 1898, the Government of
the South African Republic proved with unanswerable force that the
preamble of the Convention of 1881 had been abolished, that Lord Derby
had himself in 1884 proposed a draft Convention, in which the preamble
was erased (see Appendix B.), and that by the ultimate acceptance of
that proposal, the suzerainty had ceased to exist.

On this account, as well as for other reasons, it contended that as no
suzerainty existed between the two countries, the objection to
Arbitration as a means of settling disputes would disappear, and the
Government reiterated their appeal to have such differences or disputes
disposed of by Arbitration.

[Sidenote: The object of the suzerainty dispute.]

Naturally this was exactly what Mr. Chamberlain did not want. He was
opposed to Arbitration dispute, because it would have probably led to
the humiliation of the British and not of the Boer Government. The
suzerainty question was introduced in the meanwhile as a "Constitutional
Proposal," which might be used for the purpose of humiliating the South
African Republic.

In his answer to the arguments put forward by the South African
Republic,[38] Mr. Chamberlain could only persist in repeating his
contention that suzerainty still existed, and did not even attempt to
refute the statement that Lord Derby had himself erased the preamble of
the Convention of 1881. It was clearly his opinion that Lord Derby had,
through stupidity and thoughtlessness, abandoned the suzerainty in
1884, just as Lord Russell had abandoned the idea of obtaining the
South African Republic in 1852, so that he would now, just as Shepstone
in 1877, have to try and disconcert the Republic by a display of force
and inflexible determination, so as not to be deprived of these
eminently "Constitutional means."

[Sidenote: The Transvaal a sovereign international state.]

[39] His arguments in this dispatch, that both the suzerainty of Her
Majesty and the right of the South African Republic to self-government
were dependent upon the preamble of the Pretoria Convention, and that if
the preamble were null and void, not only would the suzerainty but also
the right to self-government disappear, were clearly designed to
intimidate the South African Republic; but in other respects the
argument was perfectly correct. Accordingly the Government of the South
African Republic replied that it did not base its claim to
self-government on the preamble of the Convention of 1881, nor on the
Convention of 1884 (for no mention is made of self-government in that
document), but simply on the ground of its being a sovereign
international state.

In other words, it contended that the Convention of London implied that
the South African Republic was a sovereign international state, and that
it was therefore superfluous in that Convention to specify or define its
rights. Into this answer, which is not only juridically and historically
correct, but which rests on the basis of common sense, the astute High
Commissioner was able to read a menace to Her Majesty's Government,
although the Government of the Republic distinctly stated in that reply
that it adhered to the Convention of London, an assurance which it had
already made hundreds of times.

[Sidenote: Justice of the Transvaal contention.]

This is the whole history of the suzerainty dispute between the two
Governments. The South African Republic had asked for arbitration on
certain questions, and England, with Mr. Chamberlain as spokesman, had
refused, because a suzerain Power could not be expected to settle
disputes with its vassal by means of arbitration. So that according to
the new principles of International Law, based on the "screw" ethics of
Birmingham, it was to be judge and jury in its own disputes with other
people.

The position taken up by our Government in this remarkable controversy
is substantiated by the actions of Lord Derby during the negotiations
about the Conventions, as well as by the following telegram, which he
sent to the High Commissioner for communication to the two Republics:--

     HIGH COMMISSIONER, CAPE TOWN.

     _To_ BRITISH RESIDENT, PRETORIA.

     Please inform Transvaal Government that I have received the
     following from the Secretary of State:--27th February. Convention
     signed to-day. New south-western boundary as proposed, following
     trade road. British Protectorate country outside Transvaal
     established with delegates' consent. They promise to appoint
     Border Commissioner inside Transvaal, co-operate with ours
     outside; Mackenzie--British Resident. Debt reduced to quarter
     million. Same complete internal independence in Transvaal as in
     Orange Free State. Conduct and control diplomatic intercourse
     Foreign Governments conceded. Queen's final approval treaties
     reserved. Delegates appear well satisfied and cordial feeling two
     Governments. You may make the above known.

This Convention is also substantiated by the express declarations of
Lord Rosmead and the Rev. D.P. Faure to the effect that it was clearly
understood, at the time the London Convention was concluded, that the
suzerainty was abolished. It is unnecessary to add anything about the
evidence of the Members of the Transvaal Deputation. The suzerainty has
thus not the slightest shadow of existence; and yet, as will be proved,
Mr. Chamberlain is prepared to go to war with the South African Republic
over this question, a war which will, according to his intentions,
result in Annexation.

[Sidenote: Uitlander grievances and Capitalistic agitation.]

While the two Governments were occupied with this question the
Capitalists were not idle. They were busy fanning the flame in another
direction. It was not only a fact that Rhodesia was an unexpected
failure, but it had proved far richer in native wars than in payable
gold mines. The Capitalist groups possessing the greatest interests in
the Witwatersrand gold mines were also the most deeply interested in
Rhodesia, and it naturally occurred to them that their Transvaal mines
ought also to bear the burden of their unprofitable investments in
Rhodesia--an adjustment which would, however, necessitate the
amalgamation of the two countries, especially when the interests of the
shareholders were considered.

In order to attain this object a continual agitation was kept up at
Johannesburg, so that English shareholders living far away should be
prepared for the day when the Annexation would take place on
Constitutional lines.

The argument which was calculated to impress these European shareholders
was that the administration of the South African Republic had created a
situation which was most prejudicial to the financial interests of the
mining industry. Viewed from this standpoint the Uitlander grievances
were an inexhaustibly rich and payable mine.

[Sidenote: The industrial Commission.]

This agitation first of all emanated directly from the Capitalists, and
had assumed such proportions in 1897 that the Government decided to
appoint a Commission of officials and mining magnates in order to
enquire searchingly into the alleged financial grievances. As far as the
Government was concerned, the chief findings of the Commission were:--

(1). That the price of dynamite (85 shillings per case of 50lbs.) was
too high under the existing concession, and that a diminution in price
was desirable either by cancellation of the concession, or by testing
the legality of the concession in the High Court.

(2). That the tariffs of the Netherlands Railway Company for the
carriage of coal and other articles were too high, and that it was
necessary to expropriate the railway.

(3). That the import duties on necessaries of life were too high, and
that the cost of living in Johannesburg for workmen was too high.

(4). That stringent measures ought to be adopted in order to prevent
gold thefts, and that the law for the total prohibition of drink to
native labourers ought to be more strictly enforced, and that there
ought to be a more stringent application of the Pass Law (under which
the traffic of the native labourers was regulated).

(5). With the object of carrying out the measures specified in Section
4, the Commission recommended that an Advisory Board should be nominated
for the Witwatersrand gold fields for the purpose of advising the
Government as to the enforcement of the said regulations.

[Sidenote: Results of the Commission.]

To what extent was effect given to these recommendations?

[Sidenote: Dynamite.]

1. As far as dynamite is concerned, it appeared that there was no chance
of contesting the concession in the law courts with any success. Nor did
the Volksraad or the Government feel justified in cancelling, without
the consent of the owners, a contract which had been solemnly entered
into, and upon which enormous sums of money had been expended. The
Mining Industry was naturally eager for cancellation, even without
adequate compensation; but the public were not at that time aware of a
fact which was made public some months later, namely, that the De Beers
Corporation intended to erect a dynamite manufactory, and that this
agitation of the Capitalists was intended to obtain for themselves the
control of this great source of income. People, however, knew that the
Messrs. Chamberlain were interested in the English ammunition and
dynamite house of Kynoch, but they hesitate to assume that the Colonial
Secretary was actuated in his Transvaal policy by considerations of
private financial interest.

The Government and Volksraad of the South African Republic adopted the
wiser plan of lowering the price of dynamite to such an extent as to
make it about equal to the local European price plus a protective tariff
of 20s. per case.

It may here be remarked that Mr. Chamberlain, knowing how unpopular the
Dynamite Concession was in the South African Republic, intimated to the
Government of the South African Republic, in a very threatening manner,
that the Concession was in conflict with the London Convention.

The answer of the Government to this communication was so crushing that
Mr. Chamberlain did not again return to the subject. In this he was, no
doubt, also actuated by the fact that the most renowned English and
European jurists had advised that the concession was in no sense a
breach of the Convention. This, however, only became known later, and it
is merely referred to now so as to show that no stone was left unturned
in order to find a means of humiliating the South African Republic.

[Sidenote: The Netherlands Railway Company.]

2. With regard to the Netherlands South African Railway Company, it
would appear that the Capitalists have altered their opinion, and now
think that the administration of the Company is as good as can
reasonably be expected, and that expropriation is now unnecessary.
Perhaps, from their point of view, it would be better to buy up the
shares of the Company, and thus become themselves masters, instead of
the Government, of this source of income.

Respecting the Railway tariff, it is fair to assume that the cause of
dissatisfaction has disappeared, for no complaints are now heard since
the tariff was lowered in accordance with the recommendations of the
Commission.

[Sidenote: Reduction of import duties]

This change in the tariff, together with the abolition of duties on
nearly all necessaries of life have made a difference of about £700,000
in the income of the State during the last year. It will be admitted
that this is an enormous item in comparison with the total income of
the South African Republic. The above tends to show how anxious the
Government of the South African Republic has been to remove all
grievances as soon as it was proved that they actually existed.

[Sidenote: Liquor, Pass, and Gold Thefts Laws.]

3. As regards the administration of the Liquor Law, the Pass Law, and
the Law dealing with Gold thefts, neither the Government nor the
Volksraad felt at liberty to adopt the recommendation as to constituting
an Advisory Board on the Witwatersrand. They decided to go deeper to the
roots of the evil, and so altered the administration of the Laws that
the evidences of dissatisfaction have disappeared. Indeed, no one ever
hears of gold thefts now, and the representative bodies of the mining
industry have repeatedly expressed their satisfaction with the
administration of the Pass Law, and especially with that of the Liquor
Law.

[Sidenote: The Liquor Law.]

In this very Liquor Law we have a test of a good administration. From
the very nature of the drink question it is one of the most difficult
laws that a Government can be called upon to administer, and the measure
of success which has attended the efforts of the Government and its
officials proves conclusively that the charges of incompetency so
frequently brought against the Government of the South African Republic
were devoid of truth, and were only intended to slander and to injure
the Republic. A combined meeting of the Chamber of Mines, the Chamber of
Commerce, and the Association of Mine Managers--the three strongest and
most representative bodies on the Witwatersrand Gold Fields--passed the
following resolutions,[40] which speak for themselves:--

     1. This combined Meeting, representing the Chamber of Mines, the
     Chamber of Commerce, and the Mine Managers' Association, desires
     to express once more its decided approval of the present Liquor
     Law, and is of opinion that prohibition is not only beneficial to
     the Natives in their own interest, but is absolutely necessary
     for the Mining Industry, with a view of maintaining the
     efficiency of labour.

     2. This Meeting wishes to express its appreciation of the efforts
     made to suppress the Illicit Liquor Trade by the Detective
     Department of this Republic since it has been placed under the
     administration of the State Attorney, and is of opinion that the
     success which has crowned these efforts fully disproves the
     contention that the Liquor Law is impracticable.

The first resolution was carried by an overwhelming majority, and the
second unanimously.

Compare this declaration of the representatives of the Mining and
Commercial interests of the Witwatersrand with the allegation repeated
by Mr. Chamberlain in his great "grievance" dispatch of the 10th May,
1899[41]--that the Liquor Law had never been strictly enforced, but that
this law was simply evaded, and that the Natives at the mines were
supplied with drink in large quantities.

When Mr. Chamberlain wrote these words they were absolutely untrue, and,
like all his grievances, are of an imaginary character.

The results have clearly shown that the Government was quite correct in
its conclusion that it was better to alter the administration of the
laws complained of, than to adopt a principle (the advisory board), the
consequences and eventual outcome of which no one was able to foresee.

[Sidenote: The South African League.]

The agitation in connection with the report of the Industrial Commission
was followed by a great calm. If it had not been that the handling of
the Swazie difficulty by the British Government gave colour to
suspicion, one might have thought that there was no cloud upon the
horizon. To a superficial observer, the two Governments seemed to be on
the best and most friendly footing, and some of us actually began to
think that the era of the fraternal co-operation of the two races in
South Africa had actually dawned, and that the cursed Raid and its
harvest of race hatred and division would be forgotten. Certain
circumstances, however, indicated clearly that the enemy was occupied in
a supreme effort to cause matters to culminate in a crisis.

The South African League, a political organisation which sprang up out
of, and owed its origin to, the race hatred which the Jameson Raid had
called into being, and at the head of which Mr. Rhodes himself stands (a
fact which places Capitalistic influence in a very clear light), began
towards the latter part of last year to agitate against the Government
in the most unheard-of way.

The individuals who stood at the head of this institution in
Johannesburg were such that very little attention was paid to the
League. It was, however, soon clearly shown that not only was the
movement strongly assisted by the Capitalists, and strongly supported
all along the mines, but that there was a close relationship in a
mysterious way with Cape Town and London. The events of the last few
months have brought this out very clearly. Meetings were arranged,
memorials to Her Majesty about grievances were drawn up, and an active
propaganda was preached in the Press; this all proved in a convincing
way that a carefully planned campaign had been organised against the
Republic.

As the Government of the South African Republic has set forth the trend
of the agitation as well as the connection of the British Government
with it in an official despatch, it is desirable to quote the language
itself:--[42] "But this Government wishes to go further. Even in regard
to those Uitlanders who are British subjects it is a small minority
which, under the pretext of imaginary grievances, promotes a secret
propaganda of race hatred, and uses the Republic as a basis for
fomenting a revolutionary movement against this Government. Ministers of
Her Majesty have so trenchantly expressed the truth about this minority
that this Government wishes to quote the very words of these Ministers,
with the object of bringing the actual truth to the knowledge of Her
Majesty's Government, as well as to that of the whole world, and not for
the purpose of making groundless accusations."

"The following words are those of the Ministers of the Cape Colony, who
are well acquainted with local conditions, and fully qualified to
arrive at a conclusion":--

"In the opinion of Ministers the persistent action, both beyond and
within this Colony, of the political body styling itself the South
African League in endeavouring to foment and excite, not to smooth and
allay ill-will between the two principal European races inhabiting South
Africa, is well illustrated by these resolutions, the exaggerated and
aggravated terms of which disclose the spirit which informs and inspires
them."

"His Excellency's Ministers are one in their earnest desire to do all in
their power to aid and further a policy of peaceful progress throughout
South Africa, and they cannot but regard it as an unwise propagandism,
hostile to the true interests of the Empire, including this Colony as an
integral part, that every possible occasion should be seized by the
League and its promoters for an attempt to magnify into greater events
minor incidents, when occurring in the South African Republic, with a
prospect thereby of making racial antagonism more acute, or of rendering
less smooth the relations between Her Majesty's Government or the
Government of this Colony and that Republic."

"Race hatred is, however, not so intense in South Africa as to enable a
body with this propaganda, aiming at revolutionary objects, to obtain
much influence in this part of the world; and one continually asks
oneself the question--'How is it that a body, so insignificant both in
regard to its principles and its membership, enjoys such a large measure
of influence?' The answer is that this body depends upon the protection
and the support of Her Majesty's Government in England, and that both
its members and its organs in the Press openly boast of the influence
they exert over the policy of Her Majesty's Government. This Government
would ignore such assertions; but when it finds that the ideas and the
shibboleths of the South African League are continually echoed in the
speeches of members of Her Majesty's Government, when it finds that blue
books are compiled chiefly from documents prepared by officials of the
South African League, as well as from reports and leading articles
containing 'malignant lies' taken from the press organs of that
organisation, thereby receiving an official character, then this
Government can well understand why so many of Her Majesty's right-minded
subjects in this part of the world have obtained the impression that the
policy advocated by the South African League is supported by Her
Majesty's Government, and is thus calculated to contribute to the
welfare and blessing of the British Empire."

"If this mistaken impression could be removed, and if it could be
announced as a fact that the South African League, as far as its actions
in the South African Republic are concerned, is only an organisation
having as its object the fomentation of strife and disorder and the
destruction of the independence of the Country, then it would very soon
lose its influence, and the strained relations existing between the two
Governments would quickly disappear. The Africander population of this
country would not then be under the apprehension that the interests of
the British Empire _imperatively demand_ that the Republic should be
done away with, and its people be either _enslaved or exterminated_.
Both sections of the white inhabitants of South Africa would then return
to the fraternal co-operation and fusion which was beginning to manifest
itself when the treacherous conspiracy at the end of 1895 awakened the
passions on both sides."

As a result of the continual agitation of the South African League,
three occurrences were selected and elevated by Mr. Chamberlain into
culminating instances of the Uitlander grievances. To give the world a
clear insight into the nature of the grievances in general, extracts are
given from the official accounts both of the British and the Republican
account of these occurrences. There were three--the "Lombard affair,"
with reference to the maltreatment of coloured British subjects at
Johannesburg; the "Edgar case," in connection with the shooting of an
English subject by a police official; and the "Amphitheatre occurrence,"
in regard to a disorderly meeting of the South African League.

[Sidenote: _a._ The Lombard Incident.]

With regard to the "Lombard incident," Mr. Chamberlain says:--[43] "As
an instance of such arbitrary action the recent maltreatment of coloured
British subjects by Field Cornet Lombard may be cited. This official
entered the houses of various coloured persons without a warrant at
night, dragged them from their beds, and arrested them for being without
a pass. The persons so arrested were treated with much cruelty, and it
is even alleged that one woman was prematurely confined, and a child
subsequently died from the consequences of the fright and exposure. Men
were beaten and kicked by the orders of the Field Cornet, who appears to
have exercised his authority with the most cowardly brutality. The
Government of the Republic, being pressed to take action, suspended the
Field Cornet, and an enquiry was held, at which he and the police denied
most of the allegations of violence; but the other facts were not
disputed, and no independent evidence was called for the defence. The
Government have since reinstated Lombard.

"Unfortunately this case is by no means unparalleled. Other British
subjects, including several from St. Helena and Mauritius, have been
arbitrarily arrested, and some of them have been fined, without having
been heard in their own defence, under a law which does not even profess
to have any application to persons from those Colonies.

"However long-suffering Her Majesty's Government may be in their anxious
desire to remain on friendly terms with the South African Republic, it
must be evident that a continuance of incidents of this kind, followed
by no redress, may well become intolerable."

The answer of the Government of the South African Republic was as
follows:--[44] "With reference to the Lombard case, this Government
wishes to point out that no complaint was lodged with any official in
this Republic for a full month after the illtreatment of Cape coloured
people was alleged to have taken place, and that neither the Government
nor the public was aware that anything had taken place. The whole case
was so insignificant that some of the people who were alleged to have
been illtreated declared, under oath, at a later period before a court
of investigation that they would never have made any complaint on their
own initiative. What happened, however?

"About a month after the occurrence the South African League came to
hear of it; some of its officials sent round to collect evidence from
the parties who were alleged to have been illtreated, and some sworn
declarations were obtained by the help of Her Majesty's Vice-Consul at
Johannesburg (between whom and this League a continual and conspicuous
co-operation has existed). Even then no charge was lodged against the
implicated officials with the judicial authorities of the country, but
the case was put in the hands of the Acting British Agent at Pretoria.

"When the allegations were brought under the notice of this Government,
they at once appointed a commission of enquiry, consisting of three
members, namely, Landdrost Van der Berg, of Johannesburg, Mr. Andries
Stockenstrom, barrister-at-law, of the Middle Temple, head of the
Criminal Section of the State Attorney's Department, and Mr. Van der
Merwe, Mining Commissioner, of Johannesburg; gentlemen against whose
ability and impartiality the Uitlander population of the Republic have
never harboured the slightest suspicion, and with whose appointment the
Acting British Agent also expressed his entire satisfaction. The
instructions given to those officials were to thoroughly investigate the
whole case, and to report the result to the Government; and they
fulfilled these instructions by sitting for days at a time, carefully
hearing and sifting the evidence of both sides. Every right-minded
person readily acknowledges that far greater weight ought to be attached
to the finding of this Commission than to the declarations of the
complainants, who contradicted one another in nearly every particular,
and who caused the whole enquiry to degenerate into a farce."

"According to the report, nothing was proved as to the so-called
illtreatment; the special instances of alleged illtreatment turned out
to be purely imaginary; but it was clearly proved and found that the
complainants had acted contrary to law, and the Commission only
expressed disapproval of the fact that the arrests and the investigation
had taken place at night, and without a proper warrant. It fills this
Government with all the greater regret to observe that Her Majesty's
Government bases its charges on _ex parte_, groundless, and, in many
respects, false declarations of complainants who have been set in motion
by political hatred, and that it silently ignores the report of the
Commission."

[Sidenote: _b._ The Edgar Case.]

Mr. Chamberlain represented the Edgar case in the following way:--[45]
"But perhaps the most striking recent instance of arbitrary action by
officials, and of the support of such action by the Courts, is the
well-known Edgar case. The effect of the verdict of the jury, warmly
endorsed by the Judge, is that four policemen breaking into a man's
house at night without a warrant, on the mere statement of one person,
which subsequently turned out to be untrue, that the man had committed a
crime, are justified in killing him there and then because, according to
their own account, he hits one of them with a stick. If this is
justification, then almost any form of resistance to the police is
justification for the immediate killing of the person resisting, who may
be perfectly innocent of any offence. This would be an alarming doctrine
anywhere. It is peculiarly alarming when applied to a city like
Johannesburg, where a strong force of police armed with revolvers have
to deal with a large alien unarmed population, whose language in many
cases they do not understand. The emphatic affirmation of such a
doctrine by Judge and jury in the Edgar case cannot but increase the
general feeling of insecurity amongst the Uitlander population, and the
sense of injustice under which they labour. It may be pointed out that
the allegation that Edgar assaulted the police was emphatically denied
by his wife and others, and that the trial was conducted in a way that
would be considered quite irregular in this country, the witnesses for
the defence being called by the prosecution, and thereby escaping
cross-examination."

The answer of the Government of the South African Republic was:--[46]
"The Edgar case is referred to by your Government as the most striking
recent instance of arbitrary action by officials, and of the support of
such action by the Courts," and this case is quoted as a conclusive
test of the alleged judicial maladministration of this Republic; it
will, therefore, be of interest to pause for a moment and consider it.
What are the true facts?

"A certain Foster, 'an Englishman,' was assaulted and felled to the
ground, without any lawful cause, by a man named Edgar during the night
of the 18th December, 1898; he lay on the ground as if dead, and
ultimately died in the hospital. Edgar escaped to his room, and some
police came on the scene, attracted by the screams of the bystanders.
Amongst the police was one named Jones. When they saw the man who had
been assaulted lying as if dead, they went to Edgar's apartment in order
to arrest him as a criminal (he had, indeed, rendered himself liable for
manslaughter, and apparently for murder). As he was caught in the very
act, the police officers were, according to the Laws, not only of this
Republic, but of all South Africa and of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, justified in breaking open the door in order to
arrest the culprit. While doing so, Edgar, with a dangerous weapon,
struck Jones a severe blow. Under the stress of necessity the latter
shot Edgar, from the effects of which he died. The question is not if
Jones was justified in taking this extreme step, for the State Attorney
of the Republic had already given effect to his opinion that this was a
case for the jury by prosecuting him for manslaughter. The question is
solely whether any jury in any country in the world would have found a
man guilty of any crime under the circumstances set forth, and whether,
if they did not find him guilty, the fact of their doing so would have
been stamped and branded as a flagrant and remarkable instance of the
maladministration of Justice.

"This Government is convinced that the English judicial administration
affords numberless instances where the facts are as strong as in this
case, and it cannot see why an occurrence which could happen in any part
of the world would be especially thrown in their teeth in the form of an
accusation.

"This Government does not wish to pass over in silence the censure which
has been passed by Her Majesty's Government on the Public Prosecutor of
Johannesburg, by whom the prosecution of this case was conducted; the
fact that being of pure English blood, that he received his legal
training in London, that he is generally respected by the Uitlander
population on account of his ability, impartiality, and general
character, will naturally not be of any weight with Her Majesty's
Government against the facts of his action in calling witnesses for the
prosecution who were intended for the defence, and thus rendering an
imaginary cross-examination abortive.

"This Government only wishes to point out that the fact that the Edgar
case is the strongest which Her Majesty's Government has been able to
quote against the administration of Justice in this Republic affords the
strongest and most eloquent proof possible that, taking it in general,
the administration of Justice on the gold fields of this Republic not
only compares favourably with that on other and similar gold fields, but
even with that of old and settled countries.

"The untrue representations of this occurrence in the Press prove
conclusively that the newspapers of the Witwatersrand, the
atrocity-mongering tactics of which constitute a share of the organised
campaign against the Republic and its Government, have been compelled to
resort to mendacious criticisms on imaginary instances of
maladministration, which were often simply invented. Where the Press is
forced to adopt such methods, the true grievances must of necessity be
unreal."

[Sidenote: _c._ The Amphitheatre occurence.]

I now give Mr. Chamberlain's accusations about The the Amphitheatre
occurrence:--[47] "Some light upon the extent to which the police can be
trusted to perform their delicate duties with fairness and discretion is
thrown by the events referred to by the petitioners, which took place at
a meeting called by British subjects for the purpose of discussing their
grievances, and held on the 14th of January in the Amphitheatre of
Johannesburg. The Government were previously apprised of the objects of
the meeting, and their assent obtained, though this was not legally
necessary for a meeting in an inclosed place. The organisers of the
meeting state that they were informed by the State Secretary and the
State Attorney that anyone who committed acts of violence or used
seditious language would be held responsible, and in proof of the
peaceful objects of the meeting, those who attended went entirely
unarmed, by which it is understood that they did not even carry sticks.
So little was any disturbance apprehended that ladies were invited to
attend, and did attend. Yet, in the result, sworn affidavits of
witnesses of different nationalities agree in the statement that the
meeting was broken up almost immediately after its opening, and many of
the persons attending it were violently assaulted by organised bands of
hostile demonstrators, acting under the instigation and guidance of
persons in Government employ, without any attempt at interference on the
part of the police, and even in some cases with their assistance or
loudly expressed sympathy.

"The Government of the South African Republic has been asked to
institute an inquiry into these disgraceful proceedings, but the request
has been met with a flat refusal."

This accusation was answered in the following manner:--[48] "The
Amphitheatre occurrence is used by Her Majesty's Government to show how
incapable the police of the Witwatersrand are to fulfil their duties and
to preserve order. The League meeting was held at the so-called
Amphitheatre at Johannesburg, with the knowledge of the State Secretary
and State Attorney, and the accusation is that in spite of that fact the
uproar which arose at that meeting was not quelled by the police. The
following are the true facts:--Mr. Wybergh and another, both in the
service of the South African League, informed the State Secretary and
the State Attorney that they intended to call this meeting in the
Amphitheatre, and asked permission to do so. They were informed that no
permission from the authorities was necessary, and that as long as the
meeting did not give rise to irregularities or disturbances of the
peace, they would be acting entirely within their rights. Their
attention was then drawn to the fact that owing to the action and the
propaganda of the South African League, this body had become extremely
unpopular with a large section of the inhabitants of Johannesburg, and
that in all probability a disturbance of the peace would take place if a
sufficient body of the police were not present to preserve order. To
this these gentlemen answered that the police were in very bad odour
since the Edgar case, that the meeting would be a very quiet one, and
that the presence of the police would contribute or give rise to
disorder, and that they would on those grounds rather have no police at
all.

"The State Secretary and State Attorney thereupon communicated with the
head officials of the police at Johannesburg, with the result that the
latter also thought that it would be better not to have any considerable
number of police at the meeting. The Government accordingly, on the
advice of these officials of the League as well as their own police
officials, gave instructions that the police should remain away from
this meeting; they did this in perfect good faith, and with the object
of letting the League have its say without let or hindrance. The
proposed meeting was, however, advertised far and wide. As the feeling
amongst a section of the Witwatersrand population was exceedingly bitter
against the League, a considerable number of the opponents of that body
also attended the meeting. The few police who were present were
powerless to quell the disorder, and when the police came on the scene
in force some few minutes after the commencement of the uproar, the
meeting was already broken up. Taken by itself, this occurrence would
not be of much importance, as it is an isolated instance as far as the
gold fields of this Republic are concerned, and even in the best
organised and best ordered communities irregularities like the above
occasionally take place.

"The gravity of the matter, however, lies in the unjust accusation of
Her Majesty's Government--that the meeting was broken up by officials of
this Republic, and that the Government had curtly refused to institute
an enquiry.

"This Government would not have refused to investigate the matter if any
complaints had been lodged with it, or at any of the local Courts, and
this has been clearly stated in its reply to Her Majesty's request for
an investigation.

"This Government objects strongly to the systematic way in which 'the
local authorities are ignored, and the continual complaints which are
lodged with the Representatives of Her Majesty about matters which ought
to be decided by the Courts of this Republic. Instead, however, of
complaining to Her Majesty's Government after all other reasonable means
of redress have been vainly invoked, they continually make themselves
guilty of ignoring and treating with contempt the local Courts and
authorities by continually making all sorts of ridiculous and _ex parte_
complaints to Her Majesty's Government in the first instance; Her
Majesty's Government is also thereby placed in the equivocal and
undesirable position of intermeddling in the internal affairs of this
Republic, which is in conflict with the London Convention. Had the
complaints been lodged with this Government, or with the proper
officials or Courts, the facts could have been very easily arrived at,
and it would have been proved that the few officials who were present at
the meeting as a section of the public had done their best to prevent
the irregularities, and that some of them had been hurt in their
endeavours to preserve order. Instead of expressing their disapproval of
such complaints, and referring the petitioners to the local Courts, Her
Majesty's Government accepts those complaints, and gives them an
official character by forwarding them for the information of this
Government, and by publishing them in blue books for the information of
the world.

"Her Majesty's Government will readily acknowledge that there is no
State in the world with any sense of dignity, however weak and
insignificant it may be, which can regard such matters with an
indifferent eye; and when the relations of the two Governments are
strained, then the mainspring must be looked for in this action of its
subjects, which is not disapproved of by Her Majesty's Government, and
not in imaginary or trumped-up grievances."

I have now examined the principal financial and administrative
grievances of the English Uitlanders. I say English Uitlanders
advisedly, because complaints are seldom or ever heard from other
nationalities, either directly or by means of diplomatic
representations.

Can it be contended with the slightest shadow of right and fairness that
these grievances afford a reason for intervention? What crimes have
been committed here against humanity or the law of nations? Do not the
recorded grievances and abuses find a parallel in occurrences which are
taking place every day in the most civilised countries? One can with
perfect justice apply to the present circumstances the language which
the Russian Government used in stigmatising the illegal intervention of
the British Government in the internal affairs of the Kingdom of
Naples[49]:--

"We would understand that, as a consequence of friendly forethought, one
Government should give advice to another in a benevolent spirit; that
such advice might even assume the character of exhortation; but we
believe that to be the furthest limit allowable. Less than ever can it
now be allowed in Europe to forget that sovereigns are equal among
themselves, and that it is not the extent of territory, but the sacred
character of the rights of each, which regulates the relations that
exist between them. To endeavour to obtain from the King of Naples
concessions as regards the internal government of his States by threats,
or by a menacing demonstration, is a violent usurpation of his
authorities, an attempt to govern in his stead; it is an open
declaration of the right of the strong over the weak."

In spite of all its hypocritical accusations, the British Government is
perfectly well aware that, notwithstanding the unparalleled difficulties
with which the Government and the Legislature have had to contend, the
administration of the South African Republic is on a sound basis, and
can, indeed, be favourably compared with that of other countries in a
similar position.

It knows full well that the grievances which are used, by means of blue
books, to stir up and excite the altruistic and humane feelings of the
British public are for the most part imaginary, and that even if they
were perfectly genuine, they nevertheless afford no ground for a
justifiable interference in the internal affairs of the Republic. It is
therefore necessary to have recourse to "Constitutional means" of
another description.

[Sidenote: Equal political rights.]

The third and last "Constitutional" method which Mr. Chamberlain has had
recourse to in order to forcibly intermeddle in the internal affairs of
the South African Republic is the claim of equal rights for all the
white inhabitants of the South African Republic. In this claim he has
also followed the inspiration of Mr. Rhodes, for after the Jameson Raid
Mr. Rhodes was prepared with a new programme for the "progressive
policy" of South Africa, and made use of the formula "Equal rights for
all white people south of the Zambesi." Mr. Rhodes altered this cry
afterwards, with an eye to the coloured vote in the Cape Colony, to
"Equal rights for all civilised persons south of the Zambesi."

In due time the echo resounded from Downing Street "Equal political
rights for all persons in the South African Republic." This formula may
be either desirable or undesirable as a political aspiration in South
Africa. But it is somewhat strange that Mr. Chamberlain should be one of
the leaders of the party in England which has strenuously opposed the
policy of manhood suffrage. In our case, however, Mr. Chamberlain does
not confine himself to friendly advice, but he _demands_ the franchise
for all Uitlanders.

The South African Republic already possesses a franchise law, according
to which every person is entitled to the full franchise after a seven
years' residence in the Republic. But Mr. Chamberlain goes much further,
and claims a far more extensive franchise. On what grounds does he base
his claim?

[Sidenote: The Royal Commission.]

He appeals to the discussions which formed a prelude to the Convention
of 1881. In the discussions, however, mention is only made of burgher
rights or civil rights, with reference to which all possible equality
has continuously existed since the Sand River Convention. To safeguard
the equality of those civil as distinguished from political rights, Art.
12 of the Pretoria Convention provides "all persons (Her Majesty's loyal
subjects) will have full liberty to reside in the country with the
enjoyment, of all civil rights, and protection for their persons and
property."

The period of the franchise was increased in 1882 from one year to five
years, without, however, any protest from Her Majesty's Government, and
in 1884 it was provided in the new Convention of that year in the most
express and clear way possible that:--

     (_Art. XIV_.).--All persons, other than natives, conforming
     themselves to the laws of the South African Republic (_a_) will
     have full liberty with their families, to enter, travel, or
     reside in any part of the South African Republic; (_b_), they
     will be entitled to hire or possess houses, manufactories,
     warehouses, shops, and premises; (_c_), they may carry on their
     commerce either in person or by any agents whom they may think
     fit to employ; (_d_), they will not be subject, in respect of
     their persons or property, or in respect of their commerce or
     industry, to any taxes, whether general or local, other than
     those which are or may be imposed upon citizens of the said
     Republic.

In this way all white Uitlanders were guaranteed in their rights of free
movement, ownership, and possession of property, trade, and commerce,
and equal taxation with the burghers. There is no mention of political
rights, nor has there ever been before this year--1899. The Government
of the South African Republic would be acting strictly in terms of the
Convention if it informed Mr. Chamberlain that it alone has to determine
upon the Franchise, as being a question of a purely internal nature; and
further, that in claiming the right in terms of that Convention to force
the Government to adopt a particular Franchise Law Mr. Chamberlain is
the party who is violating the Convention.

[Sidenote: The Bloemfontein Conference.]

The Government of the South African Republic, however, took up a higher
position; the State President went to Bloemfontein for the purpose of
discussing even internal affairs in a friendly spirit with the High
Commissioner--_inter alia_--the question of the franchise, as he was
actuated by the wish to consolidate and promote the peace of South
Africa. [50] Sir Alfred Milner said there: "If the question could be
settled upon a broad and firm basis, the tension would disappear and
everything come right in time." He has done his best latterly to prove
that he did not say or mean anything of the kind, that the franchise
question was only one of the burning internal matters in which Her
Majesty's Government interested itself, and that a favourable
understanding about the franchise would in no way pave the way to an
agreement as to the other points of difference.

[Sidenote: Sir Alfred Milner's attitude.]

The attitude of Sir Alfred Milner in this and other questions is,
however, of such a nature that it is better to say nothing about his
conduct, but to leave him to the judgment of public opinion and history.
No agreement being possible between the parties, President Kruger left
Bloemfontein and amended the Franchise Law in such a way that the Orange
Free State, the Africanders of Cape Colony, and even Mr. Schreiner,
Premier of the Cape Colony, publicly signified their approval of the
amendments which had been made.

[Sidenote: The joint Commission of Enquiry.]

Mr. Chamberlain now discarded the appearance of friendliness, and began
to adopt a menacing tone in his communications to the Government of the
South African Republic. He proposed that the question as to whether the
new Franchise Law was satisfactory or not should be discussed by a Joint
Commission.

In the meanwhile, owing to informal conversations between the State
Attorney and the British Government, there seemed to be a reasonable
prospect of a speedy and satisfactory settlement.[51] The British
Government, on being sounded by its agent, announced that if a five
years' franchise, unhampered by complicated conditions, and with a
quarter representation for the gold fields, were conceded, it would be
prepared to consider the conditions, upon which the proposal depended,
on their merits, and would not consider such a proposal as a refusal to
accept the Joint Enquiry. The conditions were that (_a_) no further
interference should take place; (_b_), that the claim of suzerainty
should drop; and (_c_) that further disputes should be settled by
Arbitration. As soon, however, as the proposal was formally made the
British Government refused to accept the condition with regard to the
dropping of the suzerainty claim, notwithstanding the fact that the High
Commissioner had declared in an official dispatch that the suzerainty
controversy appeared to him to be etymological and not political.[52]
Shortly afterwards the British Government made what was practically the
same proposal, but _without_ the condition as to the dropping of the
suzerainty claim.

[Sidenote: Bad faith of the British Government.]

As the Government of the South African Republic attached a vital
importance to this condition, in view maintaining its international
status, it refused to accept the proposal in this form; it, however, now
reverted to the invitation for a joint enquiry, which it agreed to
accept, but the British Government replied that it was too late, and
that as a matter of fact it no longer adhered to the invitation.

Here we see in the clearest light--

(1). That, although the High Commissioner had stated that the suzerainty
was only a question of etymological importance, that although the
British Government had never been able to refute the arguments advanced
by the South African Republic as to the abolition of the suzerainty in
1884, the British Government was nevertheless determined not to abandon
its pretension, and is now prepared to make war in South Africa over
this point.

(2). That the British Government invites the South African Republic to a
joint enquiry, and, when this invitation, which had never been
withdrawn, is accepted, the acceptance is refused with every mark of
contempt.

Is there any instance in the history of civilised diplomacy of such
trickery and such callous jugglery with the highest interests of South
Africa?

Can anyone wonder that South Africa has lost all confidence in British
statesmanship?

The British name has been sullied in this part of the world by many
perfidious actions, but of a truth I cannot instance any more despicable
and repellent incidents than those which have marked the course of
events during the last few months.

And the consequence of this trickery will be written with the blood and
the tears of thousands of innocent people.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 33: Dispatches of 12th August, 1896; 21st August, 1896; 17th
February, 1897. C. 8423 and C. 8721.]

[Footnote 34: Dispatches of the 6th March, 1897. C. 8423.]

[Footnote 35: Dispatch, 7th May, 1897. No. 3, C. 8721.]

[Footnote 36: Dispatch, October, 1897. No. 7, C. 8721.]

[Footnote 37: Dispatch, 16th April, 1898. No. 4, C. 9507.]

[Footnote 38: Dispatch. C. 9507. Page 33.]

[Footnote 39: Dispatch, 17th March, 1899. C. 9507.]

[Footnote 40: 17th August, 1899.]

[Footnote 41: Dispatch, 10th May, 1899. No. 83, C. 9345.]

[Footnote 42: Dispatch of the Transvaal Government, 26th September,
1899. Appendix C.]

[Footnote 43: Dispatch, 10th May, 1899. Blue Book, C. 9345. Page 229.]

[Footnote 44: Dispatch. Appendix C.]

[Footnote 45: Dispatch, 10th May, 1899. C. 9345. Page 229.]

[Footnote 46: Appendix C.]

[Footnote 47: Dispatch, 10th May, 1899. Blue Book, C. 9345. Page 229.]

[Footnote 48: Appendix C.]

[Footnote 49: _Life of Prince Consort_, Vol. III., page 510.]

[Footnote 50: Blue Book, C. 9404.]

[Footnote 51: Blue Book, C. 9530.]

[Footnote 52: Blue Book, C. 9507. Page 6.]




CONCLUSION.


I have now reviewed all the facts connected with the history of our
oppression and persecution during the past hundred years. The
allegations I have made are not invented, but are based upon the
statements of the most reliable witnesses, nearly all of them of British
nationality; they are facts that have been declared incontestable before
the tribunal of history. As far as the more recent occurrences since
1898 are concerned, I may state that I have had personal knowledge of
all the negociations and questions at issue above referred to, and I can
only declare that I have confined myself to facts; these will stand out
in a much clearer light when the curtain is raised and the events of the
last two years in this sorely afflicted part of the world are revealed.

In this awful turning point in the history of South Africa, on the eve
of the conflict which threatens to exterminate our people, it behoves us
to speak the truth in what may be, perchance, our last message to the
world. Even if we are exterminated the truth will triumph through us
over our conquerors, and will sterilise and paralyse all their efforts
until they too disappear in the night of oblivion.

Up to the present our people have remained silent; we have been spat
upon by the enemy, slandered, harried, and treated with every possible
mark of disdain and contempt. But our people, with a dignity which
reminds the world of a greater and more painful example of suffering,
have borne in silence the taunts and derision of their opponents;
indeed, they elected out of a sense of duty to remedy the faults and
abuses which had crept into their public administration during moments
of relaxed vigilance. But even this was ascribed to weakness and
cowardice. Latterly our people have been represented by influential
statesmen and on hundreds of platforms in England as incompetent,
uncivilised, dishonourable, untrustworthy, corrupt, bloodthirsty,
treacherous, etc., etc., so that not only the British public, but nearly
the whole world, began to believe that we stood on the same level as the
wild beasts. In the face of these taunts and this provocation our people
still remained silent. We were forced to learn from formal blue books
issued by Her Majesty's Government and from dispatches of Her Majesty's
High Commissioner in South Africa that our unscrupulous State
Government, and our unjust, unprincipled, and disorderly administration,
was a continual festering sore, which, like a pestilential vapour,
defiled the moral and political atmosphere of South Africa. We remained
silent. We were accused in innumerable newspapers of all sorts of
misdeeds against civilisation and humanity; crimes were imputed to us,
the bare narration of which was sufficient to cause the hair to rise
with horror. If the reading public believe a hundredth part of the
enormities which have been laid at the door of our people and
Government, they must be irresistibly forced to the conclusion that this
Republic is a den of thieves and a sink of iniquity, a people, in fact,
the very existence of which is a blot upon humanity, and a nuisance to
mankind. Of the enormous sums which we are alleged to have spent out of
the Secret Service Fund in order to purchase the good opinion of the
world there has been no practical result or evidence, for the breath of
slander went on steadily increasing with the violence of a hurricane.
But our people remained silent, partly out of stupidity, partly out of a
feeling of despairing helplessness, and partly because, being a pastoral
people, they read no newspapers, and were thus unaware of the way in
which the feeling of the whole world was being prejudiced against them
by the efforts of malignant hate.

The practical effect has been that our case has been lost by default
before the tribunal of public opinion. That is why I feel compelled to
state the facts which have characterised the attitude of the British
towards us during the Nineteenth century. Naboth's title to his vineyard
must be cancelled. The easiest way of securing that object, according to
the tortuous methods of British diplomacy, was to prove that Naboth was
a scoundrel and Ahab an angel. The facts which have marked Ahab's career
have been stated. I shall now proceed to draw my conclusions, which I
submit must appeal irresistibly to every impartial and right-minded
person.

During this century there have been three periods which have been
characterised by different attitudes of the British Government towards
us. The first began in 1806, and lasted until the middle of the century.
During this period the chief feature of British policy was one of utter
contempt, and the general trend of British feeling in regard to our
unfortunate people can be summarised by the phrase, "The stupid and
dirty Dutch." But the hypocritical ingenuity of British policy was
perfectly competent to express this contempt in accents which harmonised
with the loftiest sentiments then prevailing. The wave of sentimental
philanthropy then passing over the civilised world was utilised by the
British Government in order to represent the Boers to the world as
oppressors of poor peace-loving natives, who were also men and brethren
eminently capable of receiving religion and civilisation.

It may seem inexplicable that the Power which stood up boldly at the
Treaty of Utrecht as the shameless champion of negro slavery was the
very one which was celebrated in South Africa for its morbid love of the
natives; the explanation, however, is that it was not so much love for
the native that underlay the apparent negrophilistic policy as hatred
and contempt of the Boer. As a result of this hatred of the Boer,
disguised under the veneer of philanthropy in regard to the aborigines,
the natives were employed as police against us; they were provided with
arms and ammunition to be used against us; they were incited to fight
us, and, wherever it was possible, they murdered and plundered us. In
fact, our people were forced to bid farewell to the Cape Colony and all
that was near and dear to them, and seek a shelter in the unknown
wilderness of the North.

As an ultimate result of this hatred, our people had to pursue their
pilgrimage of martyrdom throughout South Africa, until every portion of
that unhappy country has been painted red with the blood, not so much
of men capable of resistance as with that of our murdered and
defenceless women and children.

The second period lasted until the year 1881. The fundamental principle
then underlying British policy was no longer one of unqualified hatred.
Results had already proved that hatred was powerless to subdue the
Africander; it had, on the other hand, contributed largely to the
consolidation of Africanderdom and to the fact that they spread over the
whole of South Africa, thus forming the predominant nationality almost
everywhere. In a moment of disinterestedness or absent-minded dejection
England had concluded treaties with the Boers in 1852 and 1854, by which
they were guaranteed in the undisturbed possession of certain wild and
apparently worthless tracts of territory.

The fundamental sentiment which governed the policy of the second period
was a feeling of regret at having made this mistake, coupled with the
firm determination to set aside its results. These wild and useless
tracts, which had been guaranteed to the Boers, appeared to be very
valuable after the Boers had rescued them from barbarism, and opened
them up for civilisation. It was felt that they ought to gleam amongst
the jewels of Her Majesty's Crown, notwithstanding the obstacle in the
treaties that had been concluded with the Boers. This was the concealed
intention. As far as the means were concerned--they were, from the very
exigency of inborn hypocrisy, partly revealed and partly concealed; the
one differing from the other, as light from darkness. The secret means
consisted in arming the Kaffir tribes against us in the most incredible
manner, and in inciting them to attack us in violation of solemn
treaties and promises. If this policy succeeded the real objects and
means could be suppressed, and England could then come forward and pose
openly as the champion of peace and order, and as the guardian angel of
civilisation in this part of the world. The Republics could then be
annexed under cover of these plausible pretexts. This policy failed as
far as the Orange Free State was concerned, because the brave burghers
of the neighbouring Republic succeeded, after great difficulty, in
overcoming Moshesh, notwithstanding the fact that their arms and
ammunition had been illegally stopped by the British Government. England
was compelled in that case to confine itself to the protection of its
"Basuto" tools. The British, however, succeeded in preventing the Boers
from reaping the legitimate fruits of their victory, and in annexing the
Diamond Fields--a flagrantly illegal act.

As far as the South African Republic is concerned, it was unfortunate
that the burghers were not vigilant enough to foresee and prevent the
crafty policy of the enemy. As the Transvaal Boers had subdued the most
powerful Kaffir tribes, they never dreamt that the insignificant Kaffir
wars in which they had been involved through English intrigue would have
been seized as a pretext to annex their country to the British Crown.
They had been remiss in not putting their full force into the field so
as to bring these little wars to a speedy conclusion. And so the Magato
and Socoecoeni campaigns were conducted in a protracted and half-hearted
way, much to the satisfaction of Sir Theophilus Shepstone, and those
who were at his back.

The Annexation was brought about. It was announced that the extension of
Her Majesty's sway and protection over the South African Republic could
alone secure unity of purpose and trade, as well as open out a prospect
of peace and prosperity. In these words of Shepstone's proclamation we
see in all its repulsive nakedness the hypocrisy which openly
masqueraded in the guise of the disinterested and pitiful Samaritan,
while its true and secret object was to inflict a fatal wound upon the
burgher Republic.

The third period of our history is characterised by the amalgamation of
the old and well-known policy of fraud and violence with the new forces
of Capitalism, which had developed so powerfully owing to the mineral
riches of the South African Republic. Our existence as a people and as a
State is now threatened by an unparalleled combination of forces.
Arrayed against us we find numerical strength, the public opinion of the
United Kingdom thirsting and shouting for blood and revenge, the
world-wide and cosmopolitan power of Capitalism, and all the forces
which underlie the lust of robbery and the spirit of plunder. Our lot
has of late become more and more perilous. The cordon of beasts of
plunder and birds of prey has been narrowed and drawn closer and closer
around this poor doomed people during the last ten years. As the wounded
antelope awaits the coming of the lion, the jackal, and the vulture, so
do our poor people all over South Africa contemplate the approach of the
foe, encircled as they are by the forces of hatred and revenge, and by
the stratagems and covetousness of their enemies. Every sea in the
world is being furrowed by the ships which are conveying British troops
from every corner of the globe in order to smash this little handful of
people. Even Xerxes, with his millions against little Greece, does not
afford a stranger spectacle to the wonder and astonishment of mankind
than this gentle and kind-hearted Mother of Nations, as, wrapped in all
the panoply of her might, riches, and exalted traditions, she approaches
the little child grovelling in the dust with a sharpened knife in her
hand. This is no War--it is an attempt at Infanticide.

And as the brain of the onlooker reels, and as his thoughts fade away
into uneasy slumbers, there arises before him in a dream the distant
prospect of Bantu children playing amongst the gardens and ruins of the
sunny south around thousands of graves in which the descendants of the
European heroes of Faith and Freedom lie sleeping.

For the marauding hordes of the Bantu are once more roving where
European dwellings used to stand. And when the question is asked--why
all this has happened? Why the heroic children of an heroic race, to
which civilisation owes its most priceless blessings, should lie
murdered there in that distant quarter of the globe? An invisible spirit
of mockery answers, "Civilisation is a failure; the Caucasian is played
out!" and the dreamer awakens with the echo of the word "Gold! gold!
gold!" in his ears.

The orchids of Birmingham are yellow. The traditions of the greatest
people on earth are tarnished and have become yellow.

The laurels which Britannia's legions hope to win in South Africa are
sere and yellow.

But the sky which stretches its banner over South Africa remains blue.
The justice to which Piet Retief appeals when our fathers said farewell
to the Cape Colony, and to which Joachim Prinsloo called aloud in the
Volksraad of Natal when it was annexed by England; the justice to which
the burghers of the Transvaal entrusted their case at Paarde Kraal in
1880, remains immutable, and is like a rock against which the yeasty
billows of British diplomacy dissolve in foam.

It proceeds according to eternal laws, unmoved by human pride and
ambition. As the Greek poet of old said, it permits the tyrant, in his
boundless self-esteem, to climb higher and higher and to gain greater
honour and might until he arrives at the appointed height, and then
falls down into the infinite depths.

Africanders, I ask you but to do as Leonidas did with his 300 men when
they advanced unflinchingly at Thermopylæ against Xerxes and his
myriads, and do not be disturbed by such men as Milner, Rhodes, and
Chamberlain, or even by the British Empire itself, but cling fast to the
God of our forefathers, and to the Righteousness which is sometimes slow
in acting, but which never slumbers nor forgets. Our forefathers did not
pale before the terrors of the Spanish Inquisition, but entered upon the
great struggle for Freedom and Right against even the mighty Philip,
unmindful of the consequences.

Nor could the rack and the persecuting bands of Louis XIV. tame or
subdue the spirit of our fathers. Neither Alva nor Richelieu were able
to compass the triumph of tyranny over the innate sentiment of Freedom
and Independence in our forefathers. Nor will a Chamberlain be more
fortunate in effecting the triumph of Capitalism, with its lust for
power, over us.

If it is ordained that we, insignificant as we are, should be the first
among all peoples to begin the struggle against the new-world tyranny of
Capitalism, then we are ready to do so, even if that tyranny is
reinforced by the power of Jingoism.

May the hope which glowed in our hearts during 1880, and which buoyed us
up during that struggle, burn on steadily! May it prove a beacon of
light in our path, invincibly moving onwards through blood and through
tears, until it leads us to a real Union of South Africa.

As in 1880, we now submit our cause with perfect confidence to the whole
world. Whether the result be Victory or Death, Liberty will assuredly
rise in South Africa like the sun from out the mists of the morning,
just as Freedom dawned over the United States of America a little more
than a century ago. Then from the Zambesi to Simon's Bay it will be

     "AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANDER."




APPENDICES




APPENDIX A.

LORD DERBY'S DISPATCH ON THE CONVENTION OF 1884.


  _To_ MESSRS. KRUGER, DU TOIT, AND SMIT.
  DOWNING STREET,
  15 _February_, 1884.

GENTLEMEN,

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 13th
inst., in which you intimate your readiness to accept the arrangement
proposed by me at our recent interview, whereby the debt of the
Transvaal State to Her Majesty's Government would be reduced by
£127,000. I will not delay to recommend this proposal to the
consideration of Her Majesty's Government.

I have considered the representations and suggestions made in the fourth
and following paragraphs of your letter, and I do not think it would now
be practicable to carry out the arrangements which you propose for the
settlement of the questions referred to. Her Majesty's Government are
willing, however, that the 20th Article of the Convention of Pretoria
shall be retained in the new Convention, with such verbal alterations as
are requisite, and I am glad to understand that this course will meet
your views.

When I had the pleasure of receiving you here on the 8th inst. we
discussed the other principal questions which, in addition to those of
the boundary and the debt, you had submitted to me in previous
correspondence, and I explained to you generally the nature and extent
of the concessions which Her Majesty's Government would be able to make
in regard to them. You were satisfied with these explanations, as far as
they were put before you; and the progress which has been made appears
to me to render it convenient that I should now transmit for your
perusal a draft of the new Convention which Her Majesty's Government
propose in substitution for the Convention of Pretoria. In this draft
the Articles of the Convention of Pretoria, which will be no longer in
force, have been printed alongside of the proposed new Articles, and
where an Article is retained and altered, the alterations have been
shown in order to explain clearly the changes which will be made. You
will find that in the draft, and the map which accompanies it, the
conclusions which have been arrived at in the course of our
communications have been closely adhered to and accurately expressed,
and I trust that you will experience no difficulty in understanding and
agreeing to each of its provisions. If, however, there should be any
point as to which you are doubtful, it may be convenient that you should
again meet me here and receive such further explanations as may be
desirable.

It does not appear to me to be necessary that I should refer in detail
to each Article of the draft. You will observe that in the preamble and
throughout the Convention the wish of your Government that the
designation "South African Republic" should be substituted for
"Transvaal State" has been complied with. In the first Article the
extension of the Western boundary is precisely defined as agreed to. By
the omission of those Articles of the Convention of Pretoria which
assigned to Her Majesty and to the British Resident certain specific
powers and functions connected with the internal government and the
foreign relations of the Transvaal State your Government will be left
free to govern the country without interference, and to conduct its
diplomatic intercourse and shape its foreign policy subject only to the
requirement embodied in the fourth Article of the new draft--that any
treaty with a foreign State shall not have effect without the approval
of the Queen.

There are other provisions in the draft which have not been the subject
of discussion with you; they are for the most part a renewal of those
declarations made on behalf of the Transvaal State in the Convention of
Pretoria, which it is desirable (as I trust you will agree in thinking)
to maintain as an assurance to all parties that there will be no
withdrawal of those securities for liberty and equal treatment which
your State has always professed itself ready to afford. I would,
however, refer more specifically to the 19th Article of the draft, in
which it is proposed that in consideration of the discontinuance of all
direct interference by this country in the government and control of the
natives within the Transvaal, it should be formally declared that your
Government will adopt and carry out the assurances which, with their
assent and approval, were given to those natives by Her Majesty's
Commissioners.

I trust that I may soon hear from you that there is no obstacle to my
informing Her Majesty's Government that the Draft Convention can be
adopted.

I have, etc.,

DERBY.


A CONVENTION CONCLUDED BETWEEN HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, &C., &C., AND THE
SOUTH AFRICAN REPUBLIC.

NOTE.--_The words and paragraphs bracketed or printed in italics are
proposed to be inserted, those within a black line are proposed to be
omitted._

[**Transcriber's Note: Words to be omitted are surrounded with '='s.**]

Her Majesty's Commissioners for the settlement of the Transvaal
Territory, duly appointed as such by a Commission passed under the Royal
Sign Manual and Signet, bearing date the 5th of April 1881, do hereby
undertake and guarantee, on behalf of Her Majesty, that from and after
the 8th day of August 1881, complete self-government, subject to the
suzerainty of Her Majesty, Her Heir and Successors, will be accorded to
the inhabitants of the Transvaal Territory, upon the following terms and
conditions, and subject to the following reservations and limitations:--

Whereas the Government of the Transvaal State, through its Delegates,
consisting of Stephanus Johannes Paulus Kruger, President of the said
State. Stephanus Johannes Du Toit, Superintendent of Education; Nicholas
Jacobus Smit, a member of the Volksraad, have represented to the Queen
that the Convention signed at Pretoria on the 3rd day of August, 1881,
and ratified by the Volksraad of the said State on the 20th October,
1881, contains certain provisions which are inconvenient, and imposes
burdens and obligations from which the said State is desirous to be
relieved; and that the south-western boundaries fixed by the said
Convention should be amended, with a view to promote the peace and good
order of the said state, and of the countries adjacent thereto; and
whereas Her Majesty the Queen, &c., &c., has been pleased to take the
said representations into consideration. Now, therefore, Her Majesty has
been pleased to direct, and it is hereby declared that the following
articles of a new Convention--shall when ratified by the Volksraad of
the South African Republic, be substituted for the Articles embodied in
the Convention of 3rd August, 1881; which latter, pending such
ratification, shall continue in full force and effect.

Signed at =Pretoria= _London_ this =3rd day of August 1881,=

  =HERCULES ROBINSON,=
  =President and High Commissioner=
  =EVELYN WOOD, Major General,=
  =Officer Administering the Government=
  =J.H. de VILLIERS.=

We, the undersigned, Stephanus Johannes Paulus Kruger, =Martinus Wessel
Pretorius=, and =Petrus Jacobus Joubert=, as =representatives delegates=
of the =Transvaal Burghers=, _South African Republic_, do hereby agree
to all the above conditions, reservations, and limitations, =under which
self government has been restored to the inhabitants of the Transvaal
Territory, subject to the enzerainty of Her Majesty, Her Heirs and
Successsors, and we agree to accept the Government of the said
Territory, with all rights and obligations thereto appertaining, on the
8th day of August 1881,= and we =promise and= undertake that this
Convention shall be ratified by a =newly elected= Volksraad of the
=Transvaal State= _South African Republic_ within =three= _six_ months
from this date.

Signed at =Pretoria,= _London_, this =3rd day of August 1881=

  =S.J.P. KRUEGER=
  =M.W. PRETORIUS=
  =P.J. JOUBERT=




APPENDIX B. (TRANSLATION).

THE ANNEXATION OF THE DIAMOND FIELDS.


In his speech at the opening of the Cape Parliament on the 18th April,
1872, Sir Henry Barkly said:--

"The Sovereignty of Her Majesty was therefore proclaimed and brought
into operation with the _full consent of the diggers_, and the
Government has since been carefully and efficiently administered,
notwithstanding considerable difficulties."

The _Diamond News_ of the 1st May, 1872, says, in referring to this
speech:--

"Of the three short paragraphs which immediately concern us, the first
is one of self-congratulation--the diggers and other inhabitants of
Griqualand accept the British Government with heartfelt satisfaction.
Sir Henry says nothing of the unaccountable and daily increasing
dissatisfaction with that Government, and perhaps he knows nothing of
it, as it would be an act of suicide for the Commissioners, which they
would not be guilty of, to report about the prevailing feelings."

On the 30th May, 1872, the _Diamond Fields_ said:--

"There can be no doubt that the population of the Diamond Fields are
strongly opposed to annexation to the Cape Colony.

"If anything like a plebiscite could be taken, the votes against being
put under the Cape Government would be in the proportion of nine to one
... even the Free State Government would get two votes to one if the
Cape Town Government were the only other candidate."

In December, 1871, scarcely a month after the dispersion of the Free
State authorities and the constitution of Sir Henry Barkly's junta,
lynch law broke out. Lawlessness and general insecurity prevailed
everywhere (see _Diamond News_, 17th January, 20th March, 17th July,
1872).

One reads in the _Diggers' Gazette_ of the 26th April, 1872:--

"No one would wish to ask for a continuation of the existing state of
affairs. Only entirely mischievous people could wish for the
continuation of such a failure as our Commissioners of British rule have
brought about on these Fields. We have formerly expressed ourselves
openly about this matter, and our local contemporaries have done the
same."

The following remarks were made in the _Diamond News_ of the 16th
December, 1871:--

"A description of Du Toit'span by night lately appeared in the _Diamond
News_ as it used to be under the admittedly unsatisfactory Free State
police, and, by way of contrast, as it now is, after the withdrawal of
that police. The comparison is not flattering to the strength of mind or
administrative capability of our present rulers, and a comparison of
Free State administration with Cape administration would in no way be
more favourable to the latter.

"The British Government, so highly prized, which would put everything to
rights and would do so much for the diggers, has brought the camps back
to their original position of having to protect themselves."

In the _Diamond News_ of the 10th July, 1872 (eight months after the
constitution of Sir Henry Barkly's rule), the following criticisms
appear:--

"Robberies are becoming so frequent that if we were only to relate the
particulars of those that have been brought to our notice we would
require more space than our limits will allow. Innumerable petty thefts
are passed by without punishment. This is certainly a charming state of
affairs! And the question naturally arises--how long will this continue?
Thieves, black and white, experienced and dangerous, and yet no night
police to stop their illegal actions! Shall we get no night police, or
must the scoundrels, who are poisoning our camps continually, enjoy the
immunity and freedom which they now appear to have?"

On the 26th July lynch law and revolt broke out afresh in an extensive
way at New Rush, the principal diggings. The _Diggers' Gazette_ made the
following remarks about this:--

"As long as Judge Lynch remains free to hold his court and to levy his
punishments, for so long can the whole framework and machinery of lawful
authority just as well cease to exist.

"Authority cannot maintain its claim to be respected as long as persons
suffering under the sense of having been injured take the law into their
own hands, solely because of the proved incapability of those in
authority to protect them where their interests mostly need protection.

"Day after day, and night after night, the one or other part of the camp
is entertained by the edifying spectacle of natives being thrashed,
tents being burnt, and white people surrounded by ferocious crowds who
can scarcely be kept back from carrying out their desire for vengeance
by a small truncheon and a thick thong.

"We do not wish to justify this state of affairs, but we cannot shut our
eyes to the injustice which almost makes it a necessity. No magistrate,
however exceptional, counts against the absence of such laws,
discipline, and police as our circumstances demand, and through want of
which there is no other prospect than that terrorism which arises out of
a blind struggle against anarchy."

The _Diamond News_, in its issue of 20th July, 1872, says:--

"The copious news in our columns, and the reports of meetings, as well
as the scenes which take place every night at mass meetings in this time
of excitement, uproar and confusion, take up nearly all our principal
columns. We heartily wish that the fire may be speedily got under, or
else it is very much to be feared that the end will be dreadfully
injurious to the safety and welfare of the innocent."

On the 19th July, 1872, a very large meeting of diggers was held at the
Market Square, New Rush, when the following resolution, among others,
was unanimously passed:--

"As this meeting is of opinion that, with a view to the prevailing
disturbances in this camp, the Commissioners ought at once, with the
Diggers' Committee, to make such amendments in the existing
unsatisfactory state of the law as will as far as possible prevent the
thefts of diamonds by native labourers, and their purchase by
unprincipled dealers, and will also make such alterations in the law so
as to promote the general welfare."

In the Cape Parliament, commencing the 5th June, 1872, Mr. Merriman
said:--

"The Fields ... were annexed and a form of government was introduced
there which could not be more ludicrous. A sort of irresponsible
Commission (the Rovers junta) was established, in which the members
could not agree, and were not responsible to anybody; he could imagine
nothing more ridiculous or which worked worse. The Orange Free State had
given the people a sort of representation, but the first act of our
Government was to abolish all the Commissions, and the result was that
the people were burdened with an irresponsible body.

"The Orange Free State had appointed a responsible official ... who was
efficient ... while we had established a court twenty miles away from
the most populated part; whereby grinding expenses had been entailed on
those who sought justice, just as if it was the only object of the
British Government to pile up heavy law costs."

Mr. Knight said: "One of the chief reasons why he was against Annexation
was that nine-tenths of the population on the fields would hold up
their hands to get rid of the present Government because they felt that
they were far better off before they were annexed."

Mr. Buchanan declared: "He himself, when he visited the Diamond Fields,
had wandered from camp to camp, and from the one sorting table to the
other, and had talked with the diggers in order to acquaint himself as
to their feelings about various matters, and he had obtained the
conviction that there was a great deal of feeling against the British
Government."

In the subsequent debate in the Cape Parliament Mr. J.H. Brown said, in
regard to Mr. Orpen's motion: "That the diggers look with the greatest
contempt on the Government which was there now, and that this Government
was quite as much hated as it deserved to be."--(_Diggers' Gazette_,
12th July, 1872).

In the _Diamond News_ of the 8th October, 1872, one reads:--

"Newspaper after newspaper comes out, and those who have a claim upon
land look eagerly to see 'what is happening about the land?' and all the
information the newspaper gives is that David Arnot, Esq., claims half
the country, and that Francis Orpen, Esq., the Surveyor, has decided
that £30 must be paid before the case of any claimant can be taken into
consideration. It is Arnot and Orpen and land; and land and Orpen and
Arnot, week after week. They appear to be made one for the other, and
for nothing and nobody else.

"Half a newspaper is filled with lists of claims of the said David, and
it becomes daily clearer and clearer that the great head chief of
Griqualand West cannot be Mr. Waterboer, but must be David
Arnot--because all the claims and all the kopjes have been provided for,
and all are for Mr. Arnot and nobody else.

"The impression is everywhere that British protection is invoked not for
British interests, nor for the interests of Britons working on the
fields here, but for the sake of two gentlemen who hold the reins with
far more power than ought to be given to anyone who is entrusted with
the administration of this country.

"Who has ever heard of a Government which binds itself to give the
surveyorship of a new country to one man only? Mr. Francis Orpen is
decidedly a first-class man in his profession ... but that does not
justify any Government in agreeing that he, and he only, is to keep the
survey of this territory entirely in his own hands. Everyone knows what
that must lead to."




APPENDIX C.

THE REPLY TO MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S DISPATCH ON GRIEVANCES.

DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, PRETORIA.

_26th September_, 1899.


SIR,

The Government of the South African Republic has the honour to
acknowledge the receipt of a copy of a certain dispatch dated 10th May,
1899, addressed to His Excellency the High Commissioner by the Secretary
of State for the Colonies, in consequence of a petition sent to Her
Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland. 21,684 signatures appear
on this petition, and are said to have been affixed thereto by an
equivalent number of British subjects resident at Johannesburg, in this
Republic.

This Government notes that Her Majesty's Government have thought fit, on
the grounds of the information already in their possession, to make
investigation into the subject matter of the aforesaid petition, and, as
a result of such investigation, to express to this Government their
views on the administration of the internal affairs of this Republic,
which said views they have at the same time communicated to the
memorialists as an answer to their petition.

This Government may be permitted to point out that the Convention of
London of 1884, entered into between this Republic and the Government of
Her Britannic Majesty, guarantees to the South African Republic full and
free internal administration without any interference from anyone
whatever. As Lord Derby notifies in his dispatch of the 15th February,
1884:--

"Your Government will be left free to govern the country without
interference, and to conduct its diplomatic intercourse, and shape its
foreign policy, subject only to the requirements embodied in the fourth
article of the new draft--that any treaty with a foreign State shall not
have effect without the approval of the Queen."

In his despatch of the 4th February, 1896, the Colonial Secretary, Mr.
Chamberlain, states:--

"In the next place, it is necessary that I should state clearly and
unequivocally what is the position which Her Majesty's Government claim
to hold toward the Government of the South African Republic. Since the
Convention of 1884, Her Majesty's Government recognised the South
African Republic as a free and independent Government as regards all its
internal affairs not touched by the Convention."

In a telegram, also from Mr. Chamberlain, dated 26th March, 1896, the
same statement is substantially made, viz.:--"Her Majesty's Government
do not claim any rights under the Conventions to prescribe particular
internal reforms which should be made in South African Republic."

This Government has always felt it a solemn duty for the Republic to
adhere strictly to the Convention of 1884 in its entirety; at the same
time, it has been consistent in protesting in the most forcible manner
against any interference or intermeddling with the internal affairs of
the Republic, and against the discussion or treatment of these affairs
with or by any other than the Republic itself, and it can discover no
reasons now which would either justify such interference or exempt it
from the accusation of being a violation of the Convention of London.

This Government feels convinced that Her Majesty's Government would not
favourably entertain a request from British subjects for intervention
because the said British subjects are unwilling (as was agreed between
this Republic and Her Majesty's Government in the Convention of London)
to conform themselves to the laws of the land and to respect the legal
institutions and customs of the South African Republic, and because they
feel aggrieved that the laws are not altered in accordance with their
demands.

The friendly relations so highly prized by this Government which have
existed between this Republic and the United Kingdom, the other party to
the Convention of London, have always been a safe guarantee to this
Government against such a breach of the Convention on the part of Her
Majesty's Government, and it greatly deplores the fact that Her
Majesty's Government has now decided to act in conflict with the
Convention of London by busying itself with the imaginary grievances of
the Uitlanders, and making representations thereanent to this
Government. Against such action this Government feels that it must
earnestly and emphatically protest, and the Right Hon. Mr. Chamberlain
could not take it amiss if this Government were to pay no further
attention to the charges against its administration contained in the
petition, or if they declined to discuss further the views of Her
Majesty's Government about these charges.

This Government has, however, on more than one occasion, notified to Her
Majesty's Government that it will attach great value to any suggestions
which may be tendered in the interests of British subjects, and it will
certainly lend a very willing ear to any friendly advice or hints which
may be given by Her Majesty's Government as being the representative of
a Power which, with this Republic and the Orange Free State, protects
and fosters the paramount interests of South Africa.

His Honour the State President was animated by these sentiments when he
accepted the courteous invitation of His Honour President Steyn to
proceed to Bloemfontein in order to confer with Your Excellency about
matters which are an equal source of interest to this Republic and Her
Majesty's Government. These friendly sentiments now prompt it to take
the liberty of drawing serious attention to the fact that Her Majesty's
Government certainly appear to be supplied with insufficient and
incorrect data about facts and occurrences from which erroneous ideas
and conclusions are drawn, so that, although desirous of avoiding
subjects the discussion of which would be contrary to the Convention,
this Government nevertheless feels that it ought to convey to Her
Majesty's Government the true position of affairs, and that it ought to
point out how the latter is misled, the condition of affairs as depicted
in the dispatch under reply being in all respects exaggerated, and in
many instances entirely untrue.

In the first place, this Government wishes to point out that, so far
from the petition which gave rise to the despatch under reply having
been signed by 21,684 British subjects, it appears indeed that it was
signed by very few people in the South African Republic--leaving aside
all mention of British subjects. This has been substantiated in many
cases by sworn declarations, many of which were handed to His Excellency
the High Commissioner during the Conference at Bloemfontein, and this
Government feels that it may flatter itself that the British Government,
after having examined these documents, will share with this Government
the view that this memorial is in itself a matter of very slight
importance, even although it may contain the signatures of a certain
number of British subjects who hold the opinion that they are entitled
to a change in the form of Government because, in violation of the
Convention entered into between this Republic and Her Majesty's
Government, they will not conform themselves to the laws of the land,
but claim alterations therein at their own caprice.

This Government is all the more convinced that this memorial is of no
great moment, and that it certainly does not express the feelings of all
the so-called Uitlanders, because another memorial has been received by
it from about 23,000 inhabitants of this Republic, nearly all
Uitlanders, and amongst whom are several British subjects. The High
Commissioner was informed that the signatures to this memorial were
obtained in a perfectly _bona fide_ way, and this information was
supported by sworn affidavits. The purport of this memorial bore
evidence to the fact that the thousands of Uitlanders who signed it were
satisfied with the administration and the Government of this Republic,
and did not share the views of the memorialists to Her Britannic Majesty
in respect of what the latter considered to be legitimate grievances.

This Government may further be permitted to point out that although the
Uitlander population may have co-operated in effecting an increase in
the revenues of the State, principally, as His Excellency has been
informed, in custom dues, prospecting licences, railway receipts, etc.,
so that the revenue in 1898 amounted to £3,983,360, the fact must not be
lost sight of, on the other hand, that gold to the value of
_£20,000,000_ was exported from the State during the same year 1898,
almost entirely by the Uitlanders.

At the same time, it must not be forgotten that although the, chief item
in custom dues is collected on goods which are imported at Johannesburg,
yet these goods are not entirely used or consumed by the Uitlanders, for
a considerable quantity is sent over the whole Republic by the wholesale
merchants to the retail dealers who do business with the burghers in the
villages and the country, so that much of what is imported into
Johannesburg is destined for consumption by the original burgher of the
Republic.

With regard to the contention that the mining industry is more heavily
taxed than in any other country, and that the cost of the necessaries of
life is higher, this Government desires to remark that this contention
is entirely contradicted by facts and statistics. The value of goods
imported into the South African Republic during 1898 amounted to
£9,996,575, and the custom duties levied thereon to £1,058,224, or 10.6
per cent. Under the Customs Union of the adjacent British Colonies the
import duties amounted to 15 per cent, of the value of the goods, a
comparison which yields a difference of nearly 50 per cent. in favour of
the Republic. When the matter is examined in detail the case is even
stronger. In the Colonies certain articles, such as bread stuffs, are
subject to a special duty of 2s., say about 30 per cent, of the value,
in corn, and 40 per cent. in meal. In this Republic the duty on both the
foregoing articles is 7-1/2 per cent.; butter is especially taxed at 3d.
per pound, or 30 per cent., under the Customs Union, while in the
Republic it is subject only to the 7-1/2 _ad valorem_ duty. Coffee and
other necessaries of life, on being compared, would show a similar
difference, and this Government therefore trusts that Her Majesty's
Government will exonerate it when it points out the incorrectness and
unreliability of the information supplied to the Secretary of State, on
which he bases his conclusion that the cost of living is unusually high
in consequence of the taxation levied by the State; that such is not the
case will be at once shown by a comparison with the taxation of the
neighbouring Colonies.

The character of the financial administration must have been erroneously
represented to Her Majesty's Government if it was simply stated that
defalcations to an amount of £18,590 had taken place. It would _ex
facie_ appear from such a statement that the above defalcations had
taken place during the past year; as a matter of fact, the Inspection
Department, which has only recently been called into existence, reported
over financial matters covering the years 1884 to 1896.

It is unfair to characterise all deficiencies as defalcations, for from
the nature of the case a deficiency does not always constitute a
defalcation. The report specified the sub-divisions of monies which had
yet to be accounted for. The first item in such deficiencies amounted
originally to £12,000, and of this £6,000 was afterwards collected, and
the balance was only brought forward; another item of _£10,808 11s._ was
brought forward in its entirety, but £3,000 of this was eventually
collected and accounted for, while continual efforts were made to secure
the balance. Many items not brought forward were collected long before
and accounted for, while during the inspection of last year it was found
that a sum of £800 yet remained to be paid in out of the deficiencies,
which balance has been accounted for.

The contention that advances to officials amounting to _£2,398,506 16s.
8d._ have remained unaccounted for is also absolutely incorrect; and the
endeavour to pass this circumstance off as constituting defalcations on
the part of officials bears ample witness to the strong desire to
mislead which has actuated the informants of Her Majesty's Government.

Any person who is even superficially acquainted with financial
administration will readily admit that this is due to a system of
accounting which was followed until recently by Her Majesty's
Government, and which obtains in some British Colonies, in Natal, for
instance, at the present moment.

This system may deserve condemnation; it does not, however, necessarily
follow that because the advances may not be speedily accounted for they
have been embezzled, and it does not appear either from the report of
the Inspector of Offices, or from the debates of the Volksraad, that
such accusations were made. But in addition to this a sum of at least
£1,968,306 is included in the aforesaid total of £2,398,506 16s. 8d.
(but which is not comprised in the customary advances), such as Orphan
Chamber £80,000, Indigent Burghers £150,000, Postal Orders £60,000,
various loans to School Committees, Sanitary Boards, and for Waterworks,
Hospitals, Committees, monies placed at interest in Europe, provisional
loans to Railway Companies, purchases of food stuffs and mules in time
of famine, and many others.

Items, too, of considerable importance appear in the advances, although
they have really been accounted for up to within a pound or two, because
for one reason or another it has not been possible to write off the
exact total, the amounts still to be accounted for having dwindled to a
very insignificant figure.

The contention that during 1896 a sum of £191,837 was paid out of the
Secret Service Money is also absolutely unfounded, for in that amount a
sum of £158,337 was included which was used for special Government
Works, as was expressly stated in a foot-note on page 44 of the
Estimates for 1897. The Secret Service Fund for that year (1896) did not
amount to more than £33,500. This faulty information, supplied to Her
Majesty's Government, is apparently taken from the said Estimates, it
would seem with the fixed determination to ignore the explanatory
foot-note on page 44.

It is incorrect to state that the system of granting concessions remains
in full force. Where the Right Hon. the Secretary of State in his
despatch refers to industrial concessions, this Government may remark
that these are privileges granted in order to stimulate and protect
local industry, and the contention that these concessions will develop
into practical monopolies is not supported by any evidence; results will
show that misleading information has been given here as well.

With regard to the question of education which has been dealt with in
the dispatch of the Right Hon. the Colonial Secretary, this Government
wishes to point out that the amount expended on education during the
year 1898 was £226,219 4s. 8d. In the former year it was less. Of this
amount £36,503 17s. 2d. was devoted to Education on the Gold Fields (for
State as well as for subsidized schools). As the number of scholars
under Act 15, 1896, as well as that of the teachers, have considerably
increased, the amount during the current year will probably be
_£53,000_. The conditions on which this money is given are certainly not
such as to exclude the children of Uitlanders from its benefits.
According to Volksraad Resolution of 1st June, 1892 (and amendments),
schools where a foreign language was the medium of instruction were
entitled to a subsidy of 20s. per pupil per quarter for the lower
standard, and 25s. for the middle standard, provided that certain
requirements as to knowledge of the official language of the country
were complied with. These requirements are a standard lower than that
for children of burghers in the country, who are taught in schools
governed by Law No. 8 of 1892.

Few, if any, Uitlanders avail themselves of this offer; the few who have
done so are now satisfied with it, and continue to enjoy the privileges
of the resolution, although it was only renewed in 1898 for those
schools which made a _bona fide_ use of it. Law No. 15, 1896, made
provision for the children of poor parents and strangers on the
proclaimed gold fields entirely at State expense, and 13 schools have
been established by this law--with 51 teachers and about 1,500
scholars--at Barberton, Pilgrims' Rest, Kaapsche Hoop, Johannesburg (5,
viz., 1 in von Brandis Street, 1 at Braamfontein, 1 at Union Ground, 1
at Vredesdorp, and 1 in Market Street), Maraisburg, Krugersdorp,
Randfontein, Klerksdorp, and Nigel. In addition to these, preparations
are being made for State schools at the City and Suburban,
Bertramstownship, Johannesburg, and at Roodepoort (Krugersdorp).

Out of the above-named 13 schools, English is the medium of instruction
in four, and of the remaining nine English is the medium for the
children of English-speaking parents, and Dutch for those of
Dutch-speaking parents. In these nine schools a little more time is
devoted to learning Dutch in each standard than was the case in the
former standard, so that equality in both languages is reached at the
5th standard.

Altogether there are 27 Dutch Africander or Hollander teachers, and 24
teachers of English origin in these 13 schools. The Dutch Africander or
Hollander teachers are obliged to possess a thorough knowledge of
English, and have either to pass an examination or produce a certificate
to that effect.

The object of the system of education in this Republic is to ensure in
the first place the foundation of general knowledge. Law No. 8, 1892,
provides this for the children of the original Boer population in their
mother tongue, in which the necessary schoolbooks must be written, with
this understanding, however, that in the 3rd standard three hours, and
in the higher ones four hours, per week out of the 25 must be devoted to
education in a foreign language.

With regard to the schools formed under the above-mentioned Resolution,
teaching is carried on through the medium of a foreign language, but at
least 5 hours per week must be devoted to the study of the official
language of the country.

Of the 13 schools formed under Law 15 of 1896, the children of strangers
are instructed in their own language, while the number of hours for
instruction in and by means of Dutch is increased in each standard.

According to a Resolution of the First Volksraad, dated the 8th August,
1898, Article 731, a certain number of the School Board members required
by Article I of Law 15 of 1896 have to be nominated and chosen by the
Executive Council out of enfranchised persons (Article 2, Law 8, 1893)
proposed by the fathers of the school children, on the understanding
that the persons so chosen shall constitute less than half of the whole
School Board, and further, that the persons so proposed shall always be
double the number of the people actually nominated. The above facts
clearly prove, according to the opinion of this Government, that Her
Majesty's Government has also been misled in respect to the matter of
education. It is clear that one-fourth of the whole educational vote has
been devoted to the gold fields, so that the children of Uitlander
residents can make use of it; that proper provision is made for
education in the mother tongue whatever it may be, while at the same
time compulsory education of the language of the country is also
provided for. That both by the Resolution of the 1st June, 1892, as well
as by the Law 15 of 1896, more has actually been done for the Uitlanders
than for the original inhabitants, and that more time is given to the
mother tongue of the children in the schools on the gold fields of this
Republic than in any country in the world, and that here again
information of a misleading character must have been given to His
Excellency and the British Government.

Law No. 15, 1896, and the schools thereby established have been
defended by Englishmen in various newspapers. (See the _S.A. News_, 10th
May, 1899; _The Star_, 22nd March, 1899; _Manchester Guardian_, etc.).

With reference to the Municipality of Johannesburg, this Government
desires to remark that in accordance with the promise made in 1896, the
grant of Municipal Administration was made to the inhabitants of
Johannesburg by which the control of that town and its suburbs was
conferred upon them.

Her Majesty's Government seem to think that this Municipality does not
answer its purpose, in the first place because half of the members must
be naturalized burghers (not fully enfranchised burghers as the dispatch
under reply erroneously contends), and in the second place because the
financial powers of the town council are restricted.

With regard to the first objection, it is impossible that this should be
a great grievance, because a residence of two years in the Republic is
sufficient for naturalisation; as a matter of fact, more than the
necessary half of the members are burghers; this shows conclusively that
the requirement of burghership is in no sense an obstacle. The objection
as to the restriction of the financial powers of the council is not
conclusive, because there is no Municipality in the world the financial
powers of which are not restricted by the law under which they are
created, and the restrictions in the case of the town council of
Johannesburg are the usual ones in such cases.

The Advisory Board recommended by the Industrial Commission would have
proved inefficient because the laws with the administration of which
that body would have had to concern itself can be carried out in a
better and more efficient way by an official like the State Attorney,
who has almost unlimited power and means of doing so. This is exactly
what has happened. All complaints with regard to gold thefts have
actually disappeared; one no longer hears of complaints as to the
operation of the pass law; while latterly, as Her Majesty's Government
must be well aware, the Chamber of Mines and other bodies of the
Witwatersrand have repeatedly expressed their satisfaction with the
stringent way in which the liquor law has been upheld. No local body,
however well informed, would have been able to do what the State
Attorney has done in this matter, and that is sufficient justification
of the action of both Government and Volksraad in refusing to establish
such an Advisory Board.

The Government now passes on to the discussion of the administration of
justice, of which so much is made in the dispatch under reply.

With regard to these allegations, this Government perceives that much
importance is attached in the dispatch to the so-called Lombard
incident, the so-called Edgar case, and the so-called Amphitheatre
occurrence.

A brief consideration of the facts referring to these three matters will
show how unfounded are the accusations of Her Majesty's Government.

With reference to the Lombard incident, this Government wishes to point
out that no complaint was lodged with any official in this Republic for
a full month after the illtreatment of Cape coloured people was alleged
to have taken place, and that neither the Government nor the public was
aware that anything had taken place. The whole case was so insignificant
that some of the people who were alleged to have been illtreated
declared under oath at a later period before a court of investigation
that they would never have made any complaint on their own initiative.
What happened, however?

About a month after the occurrence the South African League came to hear
of it; some of its officials sent round to collect evidence from the
parties who were alleged to have been illtreated, and some sworn
declarations were obtained by the help of Her Majesty's Vice-Consul at
Johannesburg (between whom and this League a continual and conspicuous
co-operation has existed). Even then no charge was lodged against the
implicated officials with the judicial authorities of the country, but
the case was put in the hands of the Acting British Agent at Pretoria.

When the allegations were brought under the notice of this Government,
they at once appointed a commission of enquiry consisting of three
members, namely, Landdrost Van der Berg, of Johannesburg, Mr Andries
Stockenstrom, barrister-at-law of the Middle Temple, head of the
Criminal Section of the State Attorney's Department, and Mr. Van der
Merwe, mining commissioner, of Johannesburg; gentlemen against whose
ability and impartiality the Uitlander population of the Republic have
never harboured the slightest suspicion, and with whose appointment the
Acting British Agent also expressed his entire satisfaction. The
instructions given to these officials were to thoroughly investigate the
whole case, and to report the result to the Government; and they
fulfilled these instructions by sitting for days at a time, and
carefully hearing and sifting the evidence of both sides. Every
right-minded person readily acknowledges that far greater weight ought
to be attached to the finding of this Commission than to the
declarations of the complainants, who contradicted one another in nearly
every particular, and who caused the whole enquiry to degenerate into a
farce.

According to the report, nothing was proved as to the so-called
illtreatment; the special instances of alleged illtreatment turned out
to be purely imaginary; it was clearly proved and found that the
complainants had acted contrary to Law, and the Commission only
expressed disapproval of the fact that the arrests and the investigation
had taken place at night, and without a proper warrant. It fills this
Government with all the greater regret to observe that Her Majesty's
Government bases its charges on _ex parte_, groundless, and in many
respects false declarations of complainants who have been set in motion
by political hatred, and that it silently ignores the report of the
Commission.

The Amphitheatre occurrence is used by Her Majesty's Government to show
how incapable the police of the Witwatersrand are to fulfil their duties
and to preserve order. The League meeting was held at the so-called
Amphitheatre at Johannesburg, with the knowledge of the State Secretary
and State Attorney, and the accusation is that in spite of that fact,
the uproar which arose at that meeting was not quelled by the police.
The following are the true facts:--Mr. Wybergh and another, both in the
service of the South African League, informed the State Secretary and
the State Attorney that they intended to call this meeting in the
Amphitheatre, and asked permission to do so; they were informed that no
permission from the authorities was necessary, and that as long as the
meeting did not give rise to irregularities or disturbances of the
peace, they would be acting entirely within their rights. Their
attention was then drawn to the fact that owing to the action and the
propaganda of the South African League, this body had become extremely
unpopular with a large section of the inhabitants of Johannesburg, and
that in all probability a disturbance of the peace would take place if a
sufficient body of the police were not present to preserve order. To
this these gentlemen answered that the police were in very bad odour
since the Edgar case, that the meeting would be a very quiet one, and
that the presence of the police would contribute, or give rise to,
disorder, and that they would on those grounds rather have no police at
all. The State Secretary and State Attorney thereupon communicated with
the head officials of the police at Johannesburg, with the result that
the latter also thought that it would be better not to have any
considerable number of police at the meeting. The Government
accordingly, on the advice of these officials of the League as well as
their own police officials, gave instructions that the police should
remain away from the meeting; they did this in perfect good faith, and
with the object of letting the League have its say without let or
hindrance. The proposed meeting was however advertised far and wide. As
the feeling amongst a section of the Witwatersrand population was
exceedingly bitter against the League, a considerable number of the
opponents of that body also attended the meeting. The few police who
were present were powerless to quell the disorder, and when the police
came on the scene in force some few minutes after the commencement of
the uproar, the meeting was already broken up. Taken by itself, this
occurrence would not be of much importance, as it is an isolated
instance as far as the gold fields of this Republic are concerned, and
even in the best organised and best ordered communities irregularities
like the above occasionally take place.

The gravity of the matter, however, lies in the unjust accusation of Her
Majesty's Government--that the meeting was broken up by officials of
this Republic, and that the Government had curtly refused to institute
an enquiry.

This Government would not have refused to investigate the matter if any
complaints had been lodged with it, or at any of the local Courts, and
this has been clearly stated in its reply to Her Majesty's request for
an investigation.

The Government objects strongly to the systematic way in which the local
authorities are ignored, and the continual complaints which are lodged
with the Representatives of Her Majesty about matters which ought to be
decided by the Courts of this Republic. Instead, however, of complaining
to Her Majesty's Government after all other reasonable means of redress
have been vainly invoked, they continually make themselves guilty of
ignoring and treating with contempt the local Courts and authorities, by
continually making all sorts of ridiculous and _ex parte_ complaints to
Her Majesty's Government in the first instance; Her Majesty's Government
is also thereby placed in the equivocal and undesirable position of
intermeddling in the internal affairs of this Republic, which is in
conflict with the London Convention. Had the complaints been lodged with
this Government, or with the proper officials or Courts, the facts could
have been very easily arrived at, and it would have been proved that
the few officials who were present at the meeting as a section of the
public had done their best to prevent the irregularities, and that some
of them had been hurt in their endeavours to preserve order.

Instead of expressing their disapproval of such complaints, and
referring the petitioners to the local Courts, Her Majesty's Government
accepts those complaints, and gives them an official character by
forwarding them for the information of this Government, and by
publishing them in blue books for the information of the world.

Her Majesty's Government will readily acknowledge that there is no State
in the world with any sense of dignity, however weak and insignificant
it may be, which can regard such matters with an indifferent eye; and
when the relations of the two Governments are strained, then the
mainspring must be looked for in this action of its subjects, which is
not disapproved of by Her Majesty's Government, and not in imaginary or
trumped-up grievances.

The Edgar case is referred to by your Government as "the most striking
recent instance of arbitrary action by officials, and of the support of
such action by the Courts," and this case is quoted as a conclusive test
of the alleged judicial maladministration of this Republic; it will
therefore be of interest to pause for a moment and consider it. What are
the true facts?

A certain Foster, "an Englishman," was assaulted and felled to the
ground, without any lawful cause, by a man named Edgar during the night
of the 18th December, 1898; he lay on the ground as if dead, and
ultimately died in the hospital. Edgar escaped to his room, and some
police came on the scene, attracted by the screams of the bystanders.
Amongst the police was one named Jones. When they saw the man who had
been assaulted lying as if dead, they went to Edgar's apartments in
order to arrest him as a criminal (he had indeed rendered himself liable
for manslaughter, and apparently for murder). As he was caught in the
very act, the police officers were, according to the Laws not only of
this Republic, but of all South Africa and of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland, justified in breaking open the door in order
to arrest the culprit. While doing so, Edgar, with a dangerous weapon,
struck Jones a severe blow. Under the stress of necessity the latter
shot Edgar, from the effects of which he died. The question is not if
Jones was justified in taking this extreme step, for the State Attorney
of the Republic had already given effect to his opinion that this was a
case for the jury by prosecuting him for manslaughter. The question is
solely whether any jury in any country in the world would have found a
man guilty of any crime under the circumstances set forth, and whether,
if they did not find him guilty, the fact of their doing so would have
been stamped and branded as a flagrant and remarkable instance of the
maladministration of justice.

This Government is convinced that the English Judicial administration
affords numberless instances where the facts are as strong as in this
case, and it cannot see why an occurrence which could happen in any part
of the world should be especially thrown in their teeth in the form of
an accusation.

This Government does not wish to pass over in silence the censure which
has been passed by Her Majesty's Government on the Public Prosecutor of
Johannesburg, by whom the prosecution of this case was conducted; the
fact that he is of pure English blood, that he received his legal
training in London, that he is generally respected by the Uitlander
population on account of his ability, impartiality, and general
character, will naturally not be of any weight with Her Majesty's
Government against the facts of his action in calling witnesses for the
prosecution who were intended for the defence, and thus rendering an
imaginary cross-examination abortive.

This Government only wishes to point out that the fact that the Edgar
case is the strongest which Her Majesty's Government has been able to
quote against the administration of justice in this Republic affords the
strongest and most eloquent proof possible that, taking it in general,
the administration of justice on the gold fields of this Republic not
only compares favourably with that on other and similar gold fields, but
even with that of old and settled countries.

The untrue representations of this occurrence in the Press prove
conclusively that the newspapers of the Witwatersrand, the
atrocity-mongering tactics of which constitute a share of the organised
campaign against the Republic and its Government, have been compelled to
resort to mendacious criticisms on imaginary instances of
maladministration which were often simply invented. Where the Press is
forced to adopt such methods, the true grievances must of necessity be
unreal.

Her Majesty's Government now proceeds to discuss certain laws of this
Republic, with the object of showing that the Uitlander population is
also oppressed by the legislature of this country, the Press Law, the
Aliens Expulsion Law, and Law No. 1 of 1897 being especially instanced.
But it can also be proved that the population of the gold fields have no
solid grounds of complaint in regard to the laws in question.

Respecting the existing Press Laws, No. 26 of 1896, and No. 14 of 1898,
it is necessary to remark that no printer, issuer, or editor of a
newspaper can be prosecuted unless he has made himself guilty of
criminal libel, so that the principle of the Grondwet of 1858 has in
this respect been rigidly adhered to. Her Majesty's Government will at
once see that these laws cannot in any way bear harshly upon the writing
public, a fact which is clearly borne out by the way in which the
newspapers of this country are edited. Nowhere else in the world has the
liberty of the Press so degenerated into license. No newspaper in any
country in the world would for one moment dare to speak of the
Government, the Legislature, and authorities of the country as the
_Star_, the _Transvaal Leader_, and similar newspapers do every day in
this Republic.

The imaginary nature of these grievances is not dispelled by the fact
that the power is vested in the State President of prohibiting either
entirely or provisionally the circulation of any printed matter which is
contrary to good morals or public order, because the very same Supreme
Court, which in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government only exists at
the mercy of this Government, has pronounced that it has no power to
prohibit the circulation of any newspaper; the freedom of the regular
Press thus remains as unrestricted as under the old Grondwet.

As a matter of fact, any person who has any practical experience of the
Press of this Republic will regard the accusation as ridiculous, and as
evincing an entire ignorance of the true facts. This power has not been
exercised by the Judges on many occasions, but only once, and in that
instance the High Court annulled the decision.

With regard to the Aliens Expulsion Law, this, like the Press Law, ought
to be estimated according to its spirit and operation. Since this law
has come into force the State President has only on one occasion made
use of the power vested in him of expelling an undesirable individual,
and his action was endorsed by the approval of the Press and the public
of the country. As similar laws exist in nearly every civilised country
in the world, it is difficult to see why such a law in this Republic
should prove so objectionable in the eyes of Her Majesty's Government.

With regard to Law No. 1 of 1897, and the dismissal of Chief Justice
Kotze by virtue of its provisions, this Government can only state that
it was with the bitterest regret that it felt itself compelled, in
consequence of the arbitrary action of the said Chief Justice, to take
comprehensive measures in order to prevent absolute constitutional and
judicial disorder and chaos. It was an instance where a Chief Justice in
conflict with a law existing for, at least, forty years, and in direct
contradiction of his own decisions, suddenly adopted and applied a new
principle, which affected the legality of the laws of the Republic, and
produced real constitutional chaos. Would not any other Government under
similar circumstances have done exactly what this Republic did, namely,
pass a special law in this unusual case, in order to remove the
exceptional difficulties?

This law was only applicable to this particular instance, and became
inoperative immediately after its application; and this Government
cannot understand how suspicion can therefore fall upon the impartial
administration of Justice in this Republic. If the Government had
acquiesced in the position taken up by the late Chief Justice, then all
titles dependent upon Volksraad resolutions would have been called in
question, which would not only have dealt a heavy blow to existing
rights, but also have plunged the administration of Justice in great
uncertainty and doubt.

By this law the Judges, instead of being brought under the influence of
the Executive Council, were really placed in the same constitutional
position as any Judge in the Supreme Court of England, who is unable to
question the validity of any law.

This Government has now traversed the various contentions of Her
Majesty's Government, which have been submitted in order to prove that
the policy of this Government, with regard to the Uitlander population
and the administration of the laws, especially on the gold fields, are
the causes of the strained relationship at present existing between the
two Governments.

This Government believes that this explanation and answer will clearly
show that these causes are in no way sufficient to have resulted in the
aforesaid tension. It is of opinion that the source of evil must be
sought for elsewhere, and it trusts that Her Majesty's Government will
not take it in bad part if it now proceeds to explain what the real root
of the evil is from its point of view; and in the first place it remarks
as a very noticeable and prominent fact that although there are
thousands of subjects of other Powers in Johannesburg, there are few
complaints heard from them or from their Governments about the so-called
grievances of the Uitlanders. If these grievances existed in reality,
and if they pressed equally on all so-called Uitlanders (and Her
Majesty's Government does not contend that in this respect a difference
is made between British subjects and subjects of other Powers), how does
it happen that the complaints always come from British subjects, and
that the subjects of other Powers, as a rule, express their sympathy
with this Government and promise it their support?

But this Government wishes to go further. Even in regard to those
Uitlanders who are British subjects, it is a small minority which, under
the pretext of imaginary grievances, promotes a secret propaganda of
race hatred, and uses the Republic as a base for fomenting a
revolutionary movement against this Government. Ministers of Her Majesty
have so trenchantly expressed the truth about this minority that this
Government wishes to quote the very words of these Ministers with the
object of bringing the actual truth to the knowledge of Her Majesty's
Government, as well as to that of the whole world, and not for the
purpose of making groundless accusations.

The following words are those of the Ministers of the Cape Colony, who
are well acquainted with local conditions and fully qualified to arrive
at a conclusion:--

"In the opinion of Ministers the persistent action, both beyond and
within this Colony, of the political body styling itself the South
African League in endeavouring to foment and excite, not to smooth and
allay, ill-will between the two principal European races inhabiting
South Africa is well illustrated by these resolutions, the exaggerated
and aggravated terms of which disclose the spirit which informs and
inspires them.

"His Excellency's Ministers are one in their earnest desire to do all in
their power to aid and further a policy of peaceful progress throughout
South Africa, and they cannot but regard it as an unwise propagandism,
hostile to the true interests of the Empire, including this Colony as an
integral part, that every possible occasion should be seized by the
League and its promoters for an attempt to magnify into greater events
minor incidents when occurring in the South African Republic, with a
prospect thereby of making racial antagonism more acute, or of
rendering less smooth the relations between Her Majesty's Government or
the Government of this Colony and that Republic."

Race hatred is, however, not so intense in South Africa as to enable a
body with this propaganda, aiming at revolutionary objects, to obtain
much influence in this part of the world; and one continually asks
oneself the question--"How is it that a body so insignificant, both in
regard to its principles and its membership, enjoys such a large measure
of influence?" The answer is that this body depends upon the protection
and the support of Her Majesty's Government in England, and that both
its members and its organs in the Press openly boast of the influence
they exercise over the policy of Her Majesty's Government. This
Government would ignore such assertions, but when it finds that the
ideas and the shibboleths of the South African League are continually
echoed in the speeches of members of H.M. Government, when it finds that
blue books are compiled chiefly from documents prepared by officials of
the South African League, as well as from reports and leading articles
containing "malignant lies" taken from the Press organs of that
organisation, thereby receiving an official character, then this
Government can well understand why so many of Her Majesty's right-minded
subjects in this part of the world have obtained the impression that the
policy advocated by the South African League is supported by Her
Majesty's Government, and is thus calculated to contribute to the
welfare and blessing of the British Empire.

If this mistaken impression could be removed, and if it could be
announced as a fact that the South African League, as far as its actions
in the South African Republic are concerned, is only an organisation
having as its object the fomentation of strife and disorder and the
destruction of the independence of the country, then it would very soon
lose its influence, and the strained relations existing between the two
Governments would quickly disappear. The Africander population of this
country would not then be under the apprehension that the interests of
the British Empire imperatively demand that the Republic should be done
away with and its people be either _enslaved_ or _exterminated_. Both
sections of the white inhabitants of South Africa would then return to
the fraternal co-operation and fusion which was beginning to manifest
itself when the treacherous conspiracy at the end of 1895 awakened the
passions on both sides.




APPENDIX D.

THE FINAL DISPATCH OF MR. STATE SECRETARY REITZ.

ENCLOSURE.


  DEPARTMENT FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS,
  GOVERNMENT OFFICE,
  PRETORIA,
  _3rd March_, 1899.

Sir,

Acknowledging the receipt of your letter of the 11th inst. _re_ the
meeting of the South African League held in the Amphitheatre at
Johannesburg on the 14th January, 1899, I have the honour to communicate
the following to you.

The complaint that the Government, or its duly authorised officials,
have acted with partiality in this matter is entirely devoid of truth,
and this Government regrets that such an unfounded and insulting
accusation should have been made nearly a month after the occurrence in
question.

Messrs. Dodd and Webb have been duly arrested and committed for trial on
account of what took place on the 24th December, 1898, upon sworn
affidavits which left nothing else for the proper officials to do but to
prosecute.

With reference to the Amphitheatre occurrence, not a single British
subject has lodged a sworn complaint against anybody with the proper
officials, so that it can hardly be expected that this Government should
now take any steps against the alleged disturbers of the peace.

Regarding the accusation that officials of this Government have
contributed to the instigation of uproar on the said occasion, this
Government can only state that no complaints have been made to it or the
proper authorities, either from British subjects or from subjects of
other Powers, so that this Government, to its regret, can do nothing in
this matter. In case, however, of such complaints being lodged with the
proper authorities, the Courts of the country are open to them.

  I have the honour to be, Sir,
  Your obedient servant,
  F.W. REITZ,
  _State Secretary._

_To_ THE HON. CUNYNGHAME GREENE, C.B.,

_British Agent, Pretoria._




APPENDIX E.

CONVENTIONS BETWEEN HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AND THE TRANSVAAL OR SOUTH
AFRICAN REPUBLIC.


SAND RIVER CONVENTION, 1852.

Minutes of a meeting held in the place of Mr. P.A. Venter, Sand River,
on Friday, the sixteenth day of January, 1852, between Major W. Hogge
and C.M. Owen, Esq., Her Majesty's Assistant Commissioners, for the
settling and adjusting of the affairs of the eastern and north-eastern
boundaries of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope on the one part, and
the following deputation from the emigrant farmers residing north of the
Vaal River:

  A.W.J. PRETORIUS, Commandant-General.
  H.S. LOMBARD, Landdrost.
  W.F. JOUBERT, Commandant-General.
  G.J. KRUGER, Commandant.
  J.N. GROBBELAAR, Raadslid.
  P.E. SCHOLTZ.
  P.G. WOLMARANS, Ouderling.
  J.A. VAN ASWEGAN, Veld-cornet.
  F.J. BOTES,          do.
  N.J.S. BASSON,       do.
  J.P. FURSTENBERG,    do.
  J.P. PRETORIUS.
  J.H. GROBBELAAR.
  J.M. LEHMAN.
  P. SCHUTTE.
  J.C. KLOPPERS: on the other part.

The Assistant Commissioners guarantee in the fullest manner, on the part
of the British Government, to the emigrant farmers beyond the Vaal River
the right to maintain their own affairs, and to govern themselves
according to their own laws without any interference on the part of the
British Government, and that no encroachment shall be made by the said
Government on the territory beyond to the north of the Vaal River, with
the further assurance that the warmest wish of the British Government is
to promote peace, free trade, and friendly intercourse with the
emigrant farmers now inhabiting or who hereafter may inhabit that
country, it being understood that this system of non-interference is
binding upon both parties.

Should any misunderstanding hereafter arise as to the true meaning of
the words "the Vaal River," this question in so far as regards the line
from the source of that river over the Drakenberg shall be settled and
adjusted by Commissioners chosen by both parties.

Her Majesty's Assistant Commissioners hereby disclaim all alliances
whatever and with whomsoever of the coloured nations to the north of the
Vaal River.

It is agreed that no slavery is or shall be permitted or practised in
the country to the north of the Vaal River by the emigrant farmers.

Mutual facilities and liberties shall be afforded to traders and
travellers on both sides of the Vaal River, it being understood that
every waggon containing ammunition and firearms coming from the south
side of the Vaal River shall produce a certificate signed by a British
magistrate or other functionary duly authorised to grant such, and which
shall state the quantities of such articles contained in said waggon to
the nearest magistrate north of the Vaal River, who shall act in the
case as the regulations of the emigrant farmers direct. It is agreed
that no objection shall be made by any British authority against the
emigrant Boers purchasing their supplies of ammunition in any of the
British Colonies and possessions of South Africa, it being mutually
understood that all trade in ammunition with the native tribes is
prohibited both by the British Government and the emigrant farmers on
both sides of the Vaal River.

It is agreed that so far as possible all criminals and other guilty
parties who may fly from justice either way across the Vaal River shall
be mutually delivered up if such should be required, and that the
British courts as well as those of the emigrant farmers shall be
mutually open to each other for all legitimate processes, and that
summonses for witnesses sent either way across the Vaal River shall be
backed by the magistrates, on each side of the same respectively, to
compel the attendance of such witnesses when required.

It is agreed that certificates of marriage issued by the proper
authorities of the emigrant farmers shall be held valid and sufficient
to entitle children of such marriages to receive portions accruing to
them in any British Colony or possession in South Africa.

It is agreed that any and every person now in possession of land, and
residing in British territory, shall have free right and power to sell
his said property and remove unmolested across the Vaal River, and _vice
versâ_, it being distinctly understood that this arrangement does not
comprehend criminals or debtors, without providing for the payment of
their just and lawful debts.

This done and signed at Sand River aforesaid, this 17th day of January,
1852.

  (Signed) A.W.J. PRETORIUS, Comdt.-General.
           H.S. LOMBARD, Landdrost.
           W.F. JOUBERT, Commandant-General.
           G.J. KRUGER, Commandant.
           W.I. HOGGE, Assistant Commissioner.
           C. MOSTYN OWEN, Assistant Commissioner.
           J.N. GROBBELAAR, R.L.
           P.E. SCHOLTZ.
           P.G. WOLMARANS, Ouderling.
           J.A. VAN ASWEGAN, Veld Cornet.
           F.J. BOTES.
           N.J.S. BASSON, Veld Cornet.
           J.P. FURSTENBERG, Veld Cornet.
           J.P. PRETORIUS.
           J.H. GROBBELAAR.
           J.M. LEHMAN.
           P. SCHUTTE.
           J.C. KLOPPERS.
  In presence of--
  (Signed) JOHN BURNET,
            Clerk to the Civil Commissioner of Winburg.
  (Signed) J.H. VISAGIE, Secretary.

       *       *       *       *       *

CONVENTION OF PRETORIA, 1881.

Preamble. Her Majesty's Commissioners for the Settlement of the
Transvaal territory, duly appointed as such by a Commission passed under
the Royal Sign Manual and Signet, bearing date the 5th of April, 1881,
do hereby undertake and guarantee on behalf of Her Majesty that, from
and after the 8th day of August, 1881, complete self-government, subject
to the suzerainty of Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, will be
accorded to the inhabitants of the Transvaal territory, upon the
following terms and conditions, and subject to the following
reservations and limitations:--

Article I. The said territory, to be hereinafter called the Transvaal
State, will embrace the land lying between the following boundaries, to
wit: [here follow three pages in print defining boundaries.]

Article 2. Her Majesty reserves to herself, her heirs and
successors--(_a_), the right from time to time to appoint a British
Resident in and for the said State, with such duties and functions as
are hereinafter defined; (_b_), the right to move troops through the
said State in time of war, or in case of the apprehension of immediate
war between the Suzerain Power and any Foreign State or Native Tribe in
South Africa; and (_c_) the control of the external relations of the
said State, including the conclusion of treaties and the conduct of
diplomatic intercourse with Foreign Powers, such intercourse to be
carried on through Her Majesty's diplomatic and consular officers
abroad.

Article 3. Until altered by the Volksraad, or other competent authority,
all laws, whether passed before or after the Annexation of the Transvaal
territory to Her Majesty's dominions, shall, except in so far as they
are inconsistent with or repugnant to the provisions of this Convention,
be and remain in force in the said State in so far as they shall be
applicable thereto, provided that no future enactment especially
affecting the interest of natives shall have any force or effect in the
said State, without the consent of Her Majesty, her heirs and
successors, first had and obtained and signified to the Government of
the said State through the British Resident, provided further that in no
case will the repeal or amendment of any laws enacted since the
Annexation have a retrospective effect, so as to invalidate any acts
done or liabilities incurred by virtue of such laws.

Article 4. On the 8th day of August, 1881, the Government of the said
State, together with all rights and obligations thereto appertaining,
and all State property taken over at the time of Annexation, save and
except munitions of war, will be handed over to Messrs. Stephanus
Johannes Paulus Kruger, Martinus Wessel Pretorius, and Petrus Jacobus
Joubert, or the survivor or survivors of them, who will forthwith cause
a Volksraad to be elected and convened, and the Volksraad, thus elected
and convened, will decide as to the further administration of the
Government of the said State.

Article 5. All sentences passed upon persons who may be convicted of
offences contrary to the rules of civilised warfare committed during the
recent hostilities will be duly carried out, and no alteration or
mitigation of such sentences will be made or allowed by the Government
of the Transvaal State without Her Majesty's consent conveyed through
the British Resident. In case there shall be any prisoners in any of the
gaols of the Transvaal State whose respective sentences of imprisonment
have been remitted in part by Her Majesty's Administrator or other
officer administering the Government, such remission will be recognised
and acted upon by the future Government of the said State.

Article 6. Her Majesty's Government will make due compensation for all
losses or damage sustained by reason of such acts as are in the 8th
Article hereinafter specified, which may have been committed by Her
Majesty's forces during the recent hostilities, except for such losses
or damage as may already have been compensated for; and the Government
of the Transvaal State will make due compensation for all losses or
damage sustained by reason of such acts as are in the 8th Article
hereinafter specified, which may have been committed by the people who
were in arms against Her Majesty during the recent hostilities, except
for such losses or damages as may already have been compensated for.

Article 7. The decision of all claims for compensation, as in the last
preceding article mentioned, will be referred to a Sub-Commission,
consisting of the Honourable George Hudson, the Honourable Jacobus
Petrus de Wet, and the Honourable John Gilbert Kotze. In case one or
more of such Sub-Commissioners shall be unable or unwilling to act the
remaining Sub-Commissioner or Sub-Commissioners will, after consultation
with the Government of the Transvaal State, submit for the approval of
Her Majesty's High Commissioner the names of one or more persons to be
appointed by them to fill the place or places thus vacated. The decision
of the said Sub-Commissioners, or of a majority of them, will be final.
The said Sub-Commissioners will enter upon and perform their duties with
all convenient speed. They will, before taking evidence or ordering
evidence to be taken in respect of any claim, decide whether such claim
can be entertained at all under the rules laid down in the next
succeeding Article. In regard to claims which can be so entertained the
Sub-Commissioners will, in the first instance, afford every facility for
an amicable arrangement as to the amount payable in respect of any
claim, and only in cases in which there is no reasonable ground for
believing that an immediate amicable arrangement can be arrived at will
they take evidence or order evidence to be taken. For the purpose of
taking evidence and reporting thereon, the Sub-Commissioners may appoint
Deputies, who will, without delay, submit records of the evidence and
their reports to the Sub-Commissioners. The Sub-Commissioners will
arrange their sittings and the sittings of their Deputies in such a
manner as to afford the earliest convenience to the parties concerned
and their witnesses. In no case will costs be allowed to either side,
other than the actual and reasonable expenses of witnesses whose
evidence is certified by the Sub-Commissioners to have been necessary.
Interest will not run on the amount of any claim, except as is
hereinafter provided for. The said Sub-Commissioners will forthwith,
after deciding upon any claim, announce their decision to the Government
against which the award is made and to the claimant. The amount of
remuneration payable to the Sub-Commissioners and their Deputies will be
determined by the High Commissioners. After all the claims have been
decided upon, the British Government and the Government of the Transvaal
State will pay proportionate shares of the said remuneration and of the
expenses of the Sub-Commissioners and their Deputies, according to the
amount awarded against them respectively.

Article 8. For the purpose of distinguishing claims to be accepted from
those to be rejected, the Sub-Commissioners will be guided by the
following rules, viz.:--Compensation will be allowed for losses or
damage sustained by reason of the following acts committed during the
recent hostilities, viz., (_a_), commandering, seizure, confiscation, or
destruction of property, or damage done to property; (_b_), violence
done or threats used by persons in arms. In regard to acts under (_a_),
compensation will be allowed for direct losses only. In regard to acts
falling under (_b_), compensation will be allowed for actual losses of
property, or actual injury to the same proved to have been caused by its
enforced abandonment. No claims for indirect losses, except such as are
in this Article specially provided for, will be entertained. No claims
which have been handed in to the Secretary of the Royal Commission after
the 1st day of July, 1881, will be entertained, unless the
Sub-Commissioners shall be satisfied that the delay was reasonable. When
claims for loss of property are considered, the Sub-Commissioners will
require distinct proof of the existence of the property, and that it
neither has reverted nor will revert to the claimant.

Article 9. The Government of the Transvaal State will pay and satisfy
the amount of every claim awarded against it within one month after the
Sub-Commissioners shall have notified their decision to the said
Government, and in default of such payment the said Government will pay
interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum from the date of such
default; but Her Majesty's Government may at any time before such
payment pay the amount, with interest, if any, to the claimant in
satisfaction of his claim, and may add the sum thus paid to any debt
which may be due by the Transvaal State to Her Majesty's Government, as
hereinafter provided for.

Article 10. The Transvaal State will be liable for the balance of the
debts for which the South African Republic was liable at the date of
Annexation, to wit, the sum of £48,000 in respect of the Cape Commercial
Bank Loan, and £85,667 in respect to the Railway Loan, together with the
amount due on 8th August, 1881, on account of the Orphan Chamber Debt,
which now stands at £22,200, which debts will be a first charge upon the
revenues of the State. The Transvaal State will, moreover, be liable for
the lawful expenditure lawfully incurred for the necessary expenses of
the Province since the Annexation, to wit, the sum of £265,000, which
debt, together with such debts as may be incurred by virtue of the 9th
Article, will be second charge upon the revenues of the State.

Article 11. The debts due as aforesaid by the Transvaal State to Her
Majesty's Government will bear interest at the rate of three and a-half
per cent., and any portion of such debt as may remain unpaid at the
expiration of twelve months from the 8th August, 1881, shall be
repayable by a payment for interest and sinking fund of six pounds and
ninepence per cent, per annum, which will extinguish the debt in
twenty-five years. The said payment of six pounds and ninepence per £100
shall be payable half yearly in British currency on the 8th February and
8th August in each year. Provided always that the Transvaal State shall
pay in reduction of the said debt the sum of £100,000 within twelve
months of the 8th August, 1881, and shall be at liberty at the close of
any half year to pay off the whole or any portion of the outstanding
debt.

Article 12. All persons holding property in the said State on the 8th
day of August, 1881, will continue after the said date to enjoy the
rights of property which they have enjoyed since the Annexation. No
person who has remained loyal to Her Majesty during the recent
hostilities shall suffer any molestation by reason of his loyalty, or be
liable to any criminal prosecution or civil action for any part taken in
connexion with such hostilities, and all such persons will have full
liberty to reside in the country, with enjoyment of all civil rights,
and protection for their persons and property.

Article 13. Natives will be allowed to acquire land, but the grant or
transfer of such land will, in every case, be made to and registered in
the name of the Native Location Commission, hereinafter mentioned, in
trust for such natives.

Article 14. Natives will be allowed to move as freely within the country
as may be consistent with the requirements of public order, and to leave
it for the purpose of seeking employment elsewhere or for other lawful
purposes, subject always to the pass laws of the said State, as amended
by the Legislature of the Province, or as may hereafter be enacted under
the provisions of the Third Article of this Convention.

Article 15. There will continue to be complete freedom of religion and
protection from molestation for all denominations, provided the same be
not inconsistent with morality and good order, and no disability shall
attach to any person in regard to rights of property by reason of the
religious opinions which he holds.

Article 16. The provisions of the Fourth Article of the Sand River
Convention are hereby re-affirmed, and no slavery or apprenticeship
partaking of slavery will be tolerated by the Government of the said
State.

Article 17. The British Resident will receive from the Government of the
Transvaal State such assistance and support as can by law be given to
him for the due discharge of his functions; he will also receive every
assistance for the proper care and preservation of the graves of such of
Her Majesty's forces as have died in the Transvaal, and if need be, for
the expropriation of land for the purpose.

Article 18. The following will be the duties and functions of the
British Resident:--

Sub-section 1. He will perform duties and functions analogous to those
discharged by a Charge d'Affaires and Consul-General.

Sub-section 2. In regard to natives within the Transvaal State he will
(_a_) report to the High Commissioner, as representative of the
Suzerain, as to the working and observance of the provisions of this
Convention; (_b_), report to the Transvaal authorities any cases of
ill-treatment of natives or attempts to incite natives to rebellion that
may come to his knowledge; (_c_), use his influence with the natives in
favour of law and order; and (_d_), generally perform such other duties
as are by this Convention entrusted to him, and take such steps for the
protection of the person and property of natives as are consistent with
the laws of the land.

Sub-section 3. In regard to natives not residing in the Transvaal (_a_)
he will report to the High Commissioner and the Transvaal Government any
encroachments reported to him as having been made by Transvaal residents
upon the land of such natives, and in case of disagreement between the
Transvaal Government and the British Resident as to whether an
encroachment has been made, the decision of the Suzerain will be final;
(_b_) the British Resident will be the medium of communication with
native chiefs outside the Transvaal, and, subject to the approval of the
High Commissioner, as representing the Suzerain, he will control the
conclusion of treaties with them; and (_c_) he will arbitrate upon every
dispute with Transvaal residents and natives outside the Transvaal (as
to acts committed beyond the boundaries of the Transvaal) which may be
referred to him by the parties interested.

Sub-section 4. In regard to communications with foreign powers, the
Transvaal Government will correspond with Her Majesty's Government
through the British Resident and the High Commissioner.

Article 19. The Government of the Transvaal State will strictly adhere
to the boundaries defined in the First Article of this Convention, and
will do its utmost to prevent any of its inhabitants from making any
encroachment upon lands beyond the said State. The Royal Commission will
forthwith appoint a person who will beacon off the boundary line between
Ramatlabama and the point where such line first touches Griqualand West
boundary, midway between the Vaal and Hart Rivers; the person so
appointed will be instructed to make an arrangement between the owners
of the farms Grootfontein and Valleifontein on the one hand, and the
Barolong authorities on the other, by which a fair share of the water
supply of the said farms shall be allowed to flow undisturbed to the
said Barolongs.

Article 20. All grants or titles issued at any time by the Transvaal
Government in respect of land outside the boundary of Transvaal State,
as defined, Article 1, shall be considered invalid and of no effect,
except in so far as any such grant or title relates to land that falls
within the boundary of the Transvaal State, and all persons holding any
such grant so considered invalid and of no effect will receive from the
Government of the Transvaal State such compensation either in land or in
money as the Volksraad shall determine. In all cases in which any
native chiefs or other authorities outside the said boundaries have
received any adequate consideration from the Government of the former
South African Republic for land excluded from the Transvaal by the First
Article of this Convention, or where permanent improvements have been
made on the land, the British Resident will, subject to the approval of
the High Commissioner, use his influence to recover from the native
authorities fair compensation for the loss of the land thus excluded,
and of the permanent improvement thereon.

Article 21. Forthwith, after the taking effect of this Convention, a
Native Location Commission will be constituted, consisting of the
President, or in his absence the Vice-President, of the State, or some
one deputed by him, the Resident, or some one deputed by him, and a
third person to be agreed upon by the President or the Vice-President,
as the case may be, and the Resident, and such Commission will be a
standing body for the performance of the duties hereinafter mentioned.

Article 22. The Native Location Commission will reserve to the native
tribes of the State such locations as they may be fairly and equitably
entitled to, due regard being had to the actual occupation of such
tribes. The Native Location Commission will clearly define the
boundaries of such locations, and for that purpose will, in every
instance, first of all ascertain the wishes of the parties interested in
such land. In case land already granted in individual titles shall be
required for the purpose of any location, the owners will receive such
compensation either in other land or in money as the Volksraad shall
determine. After the boundaries of any location have been fixed, no
fresh grant of land within such location will be made, nor will the
boundaries be altered without the consent of the Location Commission. No
fresh grants of land will be made in the districts of Waterberg,
Zoutpansberg, and Lydenburg until the locations in the said districts
respectively shall have been defined by the said Commission.

Article 23. If not released before the taking effect of this Convention,
Sikukuni, and those of his followers who have been imprisoned with him,
will be forthwith released, and the boundaries of his location will be
defined by the Native Location Commission in the manner indicated in the
last preceding Article.

Article 24. The independence of the Swazies within the boundary line of
Swaziland, as indicated in the First Article of this Convention, will be
fully recognised.

Article 25. No other or higher duties will be imposed on the
importation into the Transvaal State of any article, the produce or
manufacture of the dominions and possessions of Her Majesty, from
whatever place arriving, than are or may be payable on the like article,
the produce or manufacture of any other country, nor will any
prohibition be maintained or imposed on the importation of any article,
the produce or manufacture of the dominions and possessions of Her
Majesty, which shall not equally extend to the importation of the like
articles, being the produce or manufacture of any other country.

Article 26. All persons other than natives conforming themselves to the
laws of the Transvaal State (_a_) will have full liberty with their
families to enter, travel, or reside in any part of the Transvaal State;
(_b_) they will be entitled to hire or possess houses, manufactures,
warehouses, shops, and premises; (_c_) they may carry on their commerce
either in person or by any agents whom they may think to employ; (_d_)
they will not be subject in respect of their persons or property, or in
respect of their commerce or industry, to any taxes, whether general or
local, other than those which are or may be imposed upon Transvaal
citizens.

Article 27. All inhabitants of the Transvaal shall have free access to
the Courts of Justice for the protection and defence of their rights.

Article 28. All persons other than natives who established their
domicile in the Transvaal between the 12th day of April, 1877, and the
date when this Convention conies into effect, and who shall within
twelve months after such last-mentioned date have their names registered
by the British Resident, shall be exempt from all compulsory military
service whatever. The Resident shall notify such registration to the
Government of the Transvaal State.

Article 29. Provision shall hereafter be made by a separate instrument
for the mutual extradition of criminals, and also for the surrender of
deserters from Her Majesty's forces.

Article 30. All debts contracted since the Annexation will be payable in
the same currency in which they may have been contracted; all
uncancelled postage and other revenue stamps issued by the Government
since the Annexation will remain valid, and will be accepted at their
present value by the future Government of the State; all licenses duly
issued since the Annexation will remain in force during the period for
which they may have been issued.

Article 31. No grants of land which may have been made, and no transfer
of mortgage which may have been passed since the Annexation, will be
invalidated by reason merely of their having been made or passed since
that date. All transfers to the British Secretary for Native Affairs in
trust for natives will remain in force, the Native Location Commission
taking the place of such Secretary for Native Affairs.

Article 32. This Convention will be ratified by a newly-elected
Volksraad within the period of three months after its execution, and in
default of such ratification this Convention shall be null and void.

Article 33. Forthwith, after the ratification of this Convention, as in
the last preceding Article mentioned, all British troops in Transvaal
territory will leave the same, and the mutual delivery of munitions of
war will be carried out.

Articles end. Here will follow signatures of Royal Commissioners; then
the following, to precede signatures of triumvirate.

We, the undersigned, Stephanus Johannes Paulus Krugen Martinus Wessel
Pretorius, and Petrus Jacobus Joubert, as representatives of the
Transvaal Burghers, do hereby agree to all the above conditions,
reservations, and limitations under which self-government has been
restored to the inhabitants of the Transvaal territory, subject to the
suzerainty of Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, and we agree to
accept the Government of the said territory, with all rights and
obligations thereto appertaining, on the 8th day of August; and we
promise and undertake that this Convention shall be ratified by a
newly-elected Volksraad of the Transvaal State within three months from
this date.

       *       *       *       *       *


LONDON CONVENTION, 1884.

A CONVENTION BETWEEN HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF
GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND AND THE SOUTH AFRICAN REPUBLIC.

Whereas the Government of the Transvaal State, through its Delegates,
consisting of Stephanus Johannes Paulus Kruger, President of the said
State, Stephanus Jacobus Du Toit, Superintendent of Education, and
Nicholas Jacobus Smit, a member of the Volksraad, have represented that
the Convention signed at Pretoria on the 3rd day of August, 1881, and
ratified by the Volksraad of the said State on the 25th October, 1881,
contains certain provisions which are inconvenient, and imposes burdens
and obligations from which the said State is desirous to be relieved,
and that the south-western boundaries fixed by the said Convention
should be amended, with a view to promote the peace and good order of
the said State, and of the countries adjacent thereto; and whereas Her
Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland has
been pleased to take the said representations into consideration: Now,
therefore, Her Majesty has been pleased to direct, and it is hereby
declared, that the following articles of a new Convention, signed on
behalf of Her Majesty by Her Majesty's High Commissioner in South
Africa, the Right Honourable Sir Hercules George Robert Robinson, Knight
Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint
George, Governor of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, and on behalf
of the Transvaal State (which shall hereinafter be called the South
African Republic) by the above-named Delegates, Stephanus Johannes
Paulus Kruger, Stephanos Jacobus Du Toit, and Nicholas Jacobus Smit,
shall, when ratified by the Volksraad of the South African Republic, be
substituted for the articles embodied in the Convention of 3rd August,
1881; which latter, pending such ratification, shall continue in full
force and effect.

Article 1. The Territory of the South African Republic will embrace the
land lying between the following boundaries, to wit:--

Beginning from the point where the north-eastern boundary line of
Griqualand meets the Vaal River, up the course of the Vaal River to the
point of junction with it of the Klip River; thence up the course of the
Klip River to the point of junction with it of the stream called
Gansvlei; thence up the Gansvlei stream to its source in the
Drakensberg; thence to a beacon in the boundary of Natal, situated
immediately opposite and close to the source of the Gansvlei stream;
thence in a north-easterly direction along the ridge of the Drakensberg,
dividing the waters flowing into the Gansvlei stream from the waters
flowing into the sources of the Buffalo, to a beacon on a point where
this mountain ceases to be a continuous chain; thence to a beacon on a
plain to the north-east of the last described beacon; thence to the
nearest source of a small stream called "Division Stream"; thence down
this division stream, which forms the southern boundary of the farm
Sandfontein, the property of Messrs. Meek, to its junction with the
Coldstream; thence down the Coldstream to its junction with the Buffalo
or Umzinyati River; thence down the course of the Buffalo River to the
junction with it of the Blood River; thence up the course of the Blood
River to the junction with it of Lyn Spruit or Dudusi; thence up the
Dudusi to its source; thence 80 yards to Bea. I., situated on a spur of
the N'Qaba-Ka-hawana Mountains; thence 80 yards to the N'Sonto River;
thence down the N'Sonto River to its junction with the White Umvulozi
River; thence up the White Umvulozi River to a white rock where it
rises; thence 800 yards to Kambula Hill (Bea. II.); thence to the source
of the Pemvana River, where the road from Kambula Camp to Burgers' Lager
crosses; thence down the Pemvana River to its junction with the Bivana
River; thence down the Bivana River to its junction with the Pongolo
River; thence down the Pongolo River to where it passes through the
Libombo Range; thence along the summits of the Libombo Range to the
northern point of the N'Yawos Hill in that range (Bea. XVI.); thence to
the northern peak of the Inkwakweni Hills (Bea. XV.); thence to Sefunda,
a rocky knoll detached from and to the north-east end of the White
Koppies, and to the south of the Musana River (Bea. XIV.); thence to a
point on the slope near the crest of Matanjeni, which is the name given
to the south-eastern portion of the Mahamba Hills (Bea. XIII.); thence
to the N'gwangwana, a double-pointed hill (one point is bare, the other
wooded, the beacon being on the former) on the left bank of the Assegai
River and upstream of the Dadusa Spruit (Bea. XII.); thence to the
southern point of Bendita, a rocky knoll in a plain between the Little
Hlozane and Assegaai Rivers (Bea. XI.); thence to the highest point of
Suluka Hill, round the eastern slopes of which flows the Little Hlozane,
also called Ludaka or Mudspruit (Bea. X.); thence to the beacon known as
"Viljoen's," or N'Duko Hill; thence to a point north-east of Derby
House, known as Magwazidili's Beacon; thence to the Igaba, a small knoll
on the Ungwempisi River, also called "Joubert's Beacon," and known to
the natives as "Piet's Beacon" (Bea. IX.); thence to the highest point
of the N'Dhlovudwalili or Houtbosch, a hill on the northern bank of the
Umqwempisi River (Bea. VIII.); thence to a beacon on the only
flat-topped rock, about 10 feet high and about 30 yards in circumference
at its base, situated on the south side of the Lamsamane range of hills,
and overlooking the valley of the great Usuto River, this rock being 45
yards north of the road from Camden and Lake Banagher to the forests on
the Usuto River (sometimes called Sandhlanas Beacon) (Bea. VII.); thence
to the Gulungwana or Ibubulundi, four smooth bare hills, the highest in
that neighbourhood, situated to the south of the Umtuli River (Bea.
VI.); thence to a flat-topped rock, 8 feet high, on the crest of the
Busuku, a low rocky range south-west of the Impulazi River (Bea. V.);
thence to a low bare hill on the north-east of and overlooking the
Impulazi River, to the south of it being a tributary of the Impulazi,
with a considerable waterfall, and the road from the river passing 200
yards to the north-west of the beacon (Bea. IV.); thence to the highest
point of the Mapumula range, the watershed of the Little Usuto River on
the north, and the Umpulazi River on the south, the hill, the top of
which is a bare rock, falling abruptly towards the Little Usuto (Bea.
III.); thence to the western point of a double-pointed rocky hill,
precipitous on all sides, called Makwana, its top being a bare rock
(Bea. II.); thence to the top of a rugged hill of considerable height
falling abruptly to the Komati River, this hill being the northern
extremity of the Isilotwani range, and separated from the highest peak
of the range Inkomokazi (a sharp cone) by a deep neck (Bea. I.). (On a
ridge in the straight line between Beacons I. and II. is an intermediate
beacon). From Beacon I. the boundary runs to a hill across the Komati
River, and thence along the crest of the range of hills known as the
Makongwa, which runs north-east and south-west, to Kamhlubano Peak;
thence in a straight line to Mananga, a point in the Libombo Range, and
thence to the nearest point in the Portuguese frontier on the Libombo
Range; thence along the summits of the Libombo Range to the middle of
the poort where the Komati River passes through it, called the lowest
Komati Poort; thence in a north by easterly direction to Pokioens Kop,
situated on the north side of the Olifant's River, where it passes
through the ridges; thence about north north-west to the nearest point
of Serra di Chicundo; and thence to the junction of the Pafori River
with the Limpopo or Crocodile River; thence up the course of the Limpopo
River to the point where the Marique River falls into it. Thence up the
course of the Marique River to "Derde Poort," where it passes through a
low range of hills, called Sikwane, a beacon (No. 10) being erected on
the spur of said range near to and westward of the banks of the river;
thence in a straight line through this beacon to a beacon (No. 9)
erected on the top of the same range, about 1,700 yards distant from
beacon No. 10; thence in a straight line to a beacon (No. 8) erected on
the highest point of an isolated hill called Dikgagong, or "Wildebeest
Kop," situated south-eastward of and about 3-1/3 miles distant from a
high hill called Moripe; thence in a straight line to a beacon (No. 7)
erected on the summit of an isolated hill or "koppie" forming the
eastern extremity of the range of hills called Moshweu, situated to the
northward of and about two miles distant from a large isolated hill
called Chukudu-Chochwa; thence in a straight line to a beacon (No. 6)
erected on the summit of a hill forming part of the same range, Moshweu;
thence in a straight line to a beacon (No. 5) erected on the summit of a
pointed hill in the same range; thence in a straight line to a beacon
(No. 4) erected on the summit of the western extremity of the same
range; thence in a straight line to a beacon (No. 3) erected on the
summit of the northern extremity of a low, bushy hill, or "koppie," near
to and eastward of the Notwane River; thence in a straight line to the
junction of the stream called Metsi-Mash wane with the Notwane River
(No. 2); thence up the course of the Notwane River to Sengoma, being the
Poort where the river passes through the Dwarsberg Range; thence, as
described in the Award given by Lieutenant-Governor Keate, dated October
17, 1871, by Pitlanganyane (narrow place), Deboaganka or Schaapkuil,
Sibatoul (bare place), and Maclase to Ramatlabama, a pool on a spruit
north of the Molopo River. From Ramatlabama the boundary shall run to
the summit of an isolated hill, called Leganka; thence in a straight
line, passing north-east of a Native Station, near "Buurman's Drift," on
the Molopo River, to that point on the road from Mosiega to the old
drift, where a road turns out through the Native Station to the new
drift below; thence to "Buurman's Old Drift"; thence in a straight line
to a marked and isolated clump of trees near to and north-west of the
dwelling-house of C. Austin, a tenant on the farm "Vleifontein," No.
117; thence in a straight line to the north-western corner beacon of the
farm "Mooimeisjesfontein," No. 30; thence along the western line of the
said farm "Mooimeisjesfontein," and in prolongation thereof, as far as
the road leading from "Ludik's Drift," on the Molopo River, past the
homestead of "Mooimeisjesfontein" towards the Salt Pans near Harts
River; thence along the said road, crossing the direct road from
Polfontein to Sehuba, and until the direct road from Polfontein to
Lotlakane or Pietfontein is reached; thence along the southern edge of
the last-named road towards Lotlakane until the first garden grounds of
that station is reached; thence in a south-westerly direction, skirting
Lotlakane, so as to leave it and all its garden ground in native
territory, until the road from Lotlakane to Kunana is reached; thence
along the east side, and clear of that road towards Kunana, until the
garden grounds of that station are reached; thence, skirting Kunana, so
as to include it and all its garden ground, but no more, in the
Transvaal, until the road from Kunana to Mamusa is reached; thence along
the eastern side and clear of the road towards Mamusa, until a road
turns out towards Taungs; thence along the eastern side and clear of the
road towards Taungs, till the line of the district known as "Stellaland"
is reached, about 11 miles from Taungs; thence along the line of the
district Stellaland to the Harts River, about 24 miles below Mamusa;
thence across Harts River to the junction of the roads from Monthe and
Phokwane; thence along the western side and clear of the nearest road
towards "Koppie Enkel," an isolated hill about 36 miles from Mamusa, and
about 18 miles north of Christiana, and to the summit of the said hill;
thence in a straight line to that point on the north-east boundary of
Griqualand West as beaconed by Mr. Surveyor Ford, where two farms,
registered as Nos. 72 and 75, do meet, about midway between the Vaal and
Harts Rivers, measured along the said boundary of Griqualand West;
thence to the first point where the north-east boundary of Griqualand
West meets the Vaal River.

Article 2. The Government of the South African Republic will strictly
adhere to the boundaries defined in the first Article of this
Convention, and will do its utmost to prevent any of its inhabitants
from making any encroachments upon lands beyond the said boundaries. The
Government of the South African Republic will appoint Commissioners upon
the eastern and western borders whose duty it will be strictly to guard
against irregularities and all trespassing over the boundaries. Her
Majesty's Government will, if necessary, appoint Commissioners in the
native territories outside the eastern and western borders of the South
African Republic to maintain order and prevent encroachments.

Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the South African
Republic will each appoint a person to proceed together to beacon off
the amended south-west boundary as described in Article 1 of this
Convention; and the President of the Orange Free State shall be
requested to appoint a referee to whom the said persons shall refer any
questions on which they may disagree respecting the interpretation of
the said Article, and the decision of such referee thereon shall be
final. The arrangement already made, under the terms of Article 19 of
the Convention of Pretoria of the 3rd August, 1881, between the owners
of the farms Grootfontein and Valleifontein on the one hand, and the
Barolong authorities on the other, by which a fair share of the water
supply of the said farms shall be allowed to flow undisturbed to the
said Barolongs, shall continue in force.

Article 3. If a British officer is appointed to reside at Pretoria or
elsewhere within the South African Republic to discharge functions
analagous to those of a Consular officer he will receive the protection
and assistance of the Republic.

Article 4. The South African Republic will conclude no treaty or
engagement with any State or nation other than the Orange Free State,
nor with any native tribe to the eastward or westward of the Republic,
until the same has been approved by Her Majesty the Queen.

Such approval shall be considered to have been granted if Her Majesty's
Government shall not, within six months after receiving a copy of such
treaty (which shall be delivered to them immediately upon its
completion), have notified that the conclusion of such treaty is in
conflict with the interests of Great Britain or of any of Her Majesty's
possessions in South Africa.

Article 5. The South African Republic will be liable for any balance
which may still remain due of the debts for which it was liable at the
date of Annexation, to wit, the Cape Commercial Bank Loan, the Railway
Loan, and the Orphan Chamber Debt, which debts will be a first charge
upon the revenues of the Republic. The South African Republic will
moreover be liable to Her Majesty's Government for £250,000, which will
be a second charge upon the revenues of the Republic.

Article 6. The debt due as aforesaid by the South African Republic to
Her Majesty's Government will bear interest at the rate of three and
a-half per cent, from the date of the ratification of this Convention,
and shall be repayable by a payment for interest and Sinking Fund of six
pounds and ninepence per £100 per annum, which will extinguish the debt
in twenty-five years. The said payment of six pounds and ninepence per
£100 shall be payable half-yearly, in British currency, at the close of
each half year from the date of such ratification: Provided always that
the South African Republic shall be at liberty at the close of any half
year to pay off the whole or any portion of the outstanding debt.

Interest at the rate of three and a-half per cent, on the debt as
standing under the Convention of Pretoria shall, as heretofore, be paid
to the date of the ratification of this Convention.

Article 7. All persons who held property in the Transvaal on the 8th day
of August, 1881, and still hold the same, will continue to enjoy the
rights of property which they have enjoyed since the 12th April, 1877.
No person who has remained loyal to Her Majesty during the late
hostilities shall suffer any molestation by reason of his loyalty; or be
liable to any criminal prosecution or civil action for any part taken in
connexion with such hostilities; and all such persons will have full
liberty to reside in the country, with enjoyment of all civil rights,
and protection for their persons and property.

Article 8. The South African Republic renews the declaration made in the
Sand River Convention, and in the Convention of Pretoria, that no
slavery or apprenticeship partaking of slavery will be tolerated by the
Government of the said Republic.

Article 9. There will continue to be complete freedom of religion and
protection from molestation for all denominations, provided the same be
not inconsistent with morality and good order; and no disability shall
attach to any person in regard to rights of property by reason of the
religious opinions which he holds.

Article 10. The British Officer appointed to reside in the South African
Republic will receive every assistance from the Government of the said
Republic in making due provision for the proper care and preservation of
the graves of such of Her Majesty's Forces as have died in the
Transvaal; and if need be, for the appropriation of land for the
purpose.

Article 11. All grants or titles issued at any time by the Transvaal
Government in respect of land outside the boundary of the South African
Republic, as defined in Article I, shall be considered invalid and of no
effect, except in so far as any such grant or title relates to land that
falls within the boundary of the South African Republic; and all persons
holding any such grant so considered invalid and of no effect will
receive from the Government of the South African Republic such
compensation, either in land or in money, as the Volksraad shall
determine. In all cases in which any Native Chiefs or other authorities
outside the said boundaries have received any adequate consideration
from the Government of the South African Republic for land excluded from
the Transvaal by the first Article of this Convention, or where
permanent improvements have been made on the land, the High Commissioner
will recover from the native authorities fair compensation for the loss
of the land thus excluded, or of the permanent improvements thereon.

Article 12. The independence of the Swazis, within the boundary line of
Swaziland, as indicated in the first Article of this Convention, will be
fully recognised.

Article 13. Except in pursuance of any treaty or engagement made as
provided in Article 4 of this Convention, no other or higher duties
shall be imposed on the importation into the South African Republic of
any article coming from any part of Her Majesty's dominions than are or
may be imposed on the like article coming from any other place or
country; nor will any prohibition be maintained or imposed on the
importation into the South African Republic of any article coming from
any part of Her Majesty's dominions, which shall not equally extend to
the like article coming from any other place or country. And in like
manner the same treatment shall be given to any article coming to Great
Britain from the South African Republic as to the like article coming
from any other place or country.

These provisions do not preclude the consideration of special
arrangements as to import duties and commercial relations between the
South African Republic and any of Her Majesty's colonies or possessions.

Article 14. All persons, other than natives, conforming themselves to
the laws of the South African Republic (_a_) will have full liberty,
with their families, to enter, travel, or reside in any part of the
South African Republic; (_b_), they will be entitled to hire or possess
houses, manufactories, warehouses, shops, and premises; (_c_) they may
carry on their commerce either in person or by any agents whom they may
think fit to employ; (_d_), they will not be subject, in respect of
their persons or property, or in respect of their commerce or industry,
to any taxes, whether general or local, other than those which are or
may be imposed upon citizens of the said Republic.

Article 15. All persons, other than natives, who established their
domicile in the Transvaal between the 12th day of April, 1877, and the
8th August, 1881, and who within twelve months after such last-mentioned
date have had their names registered by the British Resident, shall be
exempt from all compulsory military service whatever.

Article 16. Provision shall hereafter be made by a separate instrument
for the mutual extradition of criminals, and also for the surrender of
deserters from Her Majesty's Forces.

Article 17. All debts contracted between the 12th April, 1877, and the
8th August, 1881, will be payable in the same currency in which they may
have been contracted.

Article 18. No grants of land which may have been made, and no transfers
or mortgages which may have been passed between the 12th April, 1877,
and the 8th August, 1881, will be invalidated by reason merely of their
having been made or passed between such dates.

All transfers to the British Secretary for Native Affairs in trust for
natives will remain in force, an officer of the South African Republic
taking the place of such Secretary for Native Affairs.

Article 19. The Government of the South African Republic will engage
faithfully to fulfil the assurances given, in accordance with the laws
of the South African Republic, to the natives at the Pretoria Pitso by
the Royal Commission in the presence of the Triumvirate and with their
entire assent (1), as to the freedom of the natives to buy or otherwise
acquire land under certain conditions; (2), as to the appointment of a
commission to mark out native locations; (3), as to the access of the
natives to the courts of law; and (4) as to their being allowed to move
freely within the country, or to leave it for any legal purpose, under a
pass system.

Article 20. This Convention will be ratified by a Volksraad of the South
African Republic within the period of six months after its execution,
and in default of such ratification this Convention shall be null and
void.

Signed in duplicate in London this 27th day of February, 1884.

  (Signed) HERCULES ROBINSON.
  (Signed) S.J.P. KRUGER.
  (Signed) S.J. DU TOIT.
  (Signed) M.J. SMIT.




INDEX.


Aberdeen Ministry, 24

Africanderdom in S. Africa,
  see under South Africa, Cape Colony, Natal, Orange Free State, Transvaal

Aliwal Convention, 20

Amphitheatre Occurrence, 70, 77-81

Arbitration Proposals, see under Transvaal


Barkly, Sir H., 26

Basutos and the Orange Free State, 17, 20, 23, 94

Bloemfontein Conference, 85

Boers in S. Africa,
  see under South Africa, Cape Colony, Natal, Orange Free State, Transvaal

Bulwer, Sir H.E.G., Governor of Natal, 28


Cape Colony:
  The Africander Spirit of Liberty, 4
  England's Native Policy, 5
  Slachter's Nek, 6
  Emancipation of the Slaves, 7
  Lord Glenelg's Policy, 8
  The Dutch Language, 9
  The Great Boer Trek into Natal, 1836, 10-13
  Piet Reliefs Manifesto, 11
  Victory of the Africander Party, 51

Capitalistic Jingoism, 37-88

Carnarvon, Fourth Earl of, 26, 29

Cathcart, Sir George, 19, 24, 25

Chamberlain, Joseph,
  Colonial Secretary, 46
  His Attitude to the Transvaal, 57-88
  Quoted, 54, 70, 73, 77

Cloete, Commissioner, 14

Colenso, Bishop, quoted, 27, 30

Cunynghame, Gen. Sir A., 21, 26


Derby, Fifteenth Earl of, and the Transvaal Convention, 34-36, 57, 59, 101

Diamond Fields, 19, 20, 25-26, 39-40, 41, 94

Dingaan, Zulu Chief, 13

Dunn, John, and the Supply of Rifles to Zulus, 31

Dynamite Concession, 61, 62-63


Edgar Case, 70, 73-77


Faure, Rev. D.P., 34, 60

Firearms supplied to Natives, 26, 31

Franchise Question, see under Transvaal

Frere, Sir Bartle,
  Governor, 26-31
  Quoted, 27, 30, 31

Froude, J.A., quoted, 8, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24


Gladstone, W.E., and the Transvaal, 27, 29, 32

Glenelg, Lord, and His Policy in S. Africa, 9

Goldfields of the Transvaal, 37-48, 60, 61, 64

Grey, Earl, referred to, 12, 18, 24


Hogge, Commissioner, 24


Import Duties, 61, 63


Jameson Raid, 46-48, 49

Jingoism and Capital, 37-88


Kaffir Aid against Boers, 17, 31

Keate, Governor, 26, 29

Kimberley and the Diamond Fields, 19, 20, 105

Kynoch & Co., Messrs., 62


Liquor Law, 61, 64-65

Loch, Sir Henry, and the Transvaal, 45-46

Lombard Affair, 70-73

London Convention, 34, 56, 58, 101, 128


Malabele and the Transvaal, 23

Milner, Sir Alfred,
  His Attitude to the Transvaal, 52, 86-88
  Quoted, 85

Missionaries in S. Africa, 6

Moffat, Dr., 26

Molesworth, Sir Wm., referred to, 12, 24

Moselikatse, Matabele Chief, 23

Moshesh, Basuto Chief, 17, 23, 94


Napier, Sir George, quoted, 14

Naples, Kingdom of,--British Intervention, 82

Natal:
  The Boer Trek into Natal, 1836, 10-13
  British Military Occupation, 13
  The Founding of Natal, 13-16
  British Annexation, 14
  Protest of Natal, 14
  Sufferings of the Boers, 15


Oliphant, Mr., Cape Attorney-General, 10

Orange Free State:
  Fight at Boomplaats, 17
  British Annexation, 17
  Collision with Moshesh, Basuto Chief, 17, 23,
  Andries Pretorius, Boer Leader, 15, 17-18, 23
The Republic restored, 18-19
  The Basutos and the Free State, 20
  Diamond Fields, 19, 20, 105
  The Treaty of Aliwal, 20
  British Breaches of the Convention, 20-22

Our Land quoted, 49

Owen, Commissioner, 24


Panda, King of Zululand, 27

Phillips, Lionel, quoted, 44, 45

Pottinger, Governor, 15

Pretoria Convention, 33, 56, 58, 84, 128

Pretorius, Andries,
  His Mission to Governor Pottinger, 15, 17-18
  Commandant-General of the Transvaal, 23-24
  His Proposals for Peace, 24

Pretorius, Martinus, President of the Transvaal, 25


Rensburg Trek, 12

Relief, Fiet,
  His Manifesto, 11
  Murder of Relief and His Party, 13

Rhodes, Cecil J., and the Transvaal, 41-48, 83

Rhodesia and Its Mines, 60

Ripon, Marquis of, 54

Rosmead, Lord, 59


Sand River Convention, 24-26, 128

Schreiner, Olive, quoted, 38

Secoecoeni, Zulu Chief, 27, 30

Shepstone, Sir T., and His Transvaal Policy, 26-31, 95

Slavery at the Cape, 7

Smith, Sir Harry,
  Quoted, 15
  His Policy, 17-18, 24

South Africa (see also Cape Colony, Natal, Zululand, Transvaal)
  The Alternative of Africanderdom, 2
  Africa for the Africander, 98

South African League, 66-81

South African Republic, see Transvaal

Stanley, Lord, 14

Stockenstrom, Lieut.-Gov., 10

Suzerainty, see under Transvaal

Swazi Allies of the British, 30


Transvaal:
  The Matabeles and the Transvaal, 23
  Fight at Vechtkop, 23
  Andries Pretorius and the British Government, 23-24
  The Sand River Convention, 24-26, 128
  British Breaches of the Convention, 26, 29
  Diamond Fields, 26, 39-40, 41
  Sale of Guns to Natives, 26
  British Annexation, 26-31, 95
  Boer Protest, 29
  The Zulus and the Transvaal, 27-31
  The War of Freedom, 32
  Annexation cancelled, 32
  The Pretoria Convention, 33, 35, 128
  The London Convention, 34, 35, 101, 128
  The Suzerainty, 34-36
  The "South African Republic," 34
  The Goldfields, 37-48, 60
  The National Union Movement, 44
  Sir Henry Loch's Indiscretion, 45-46
  The Conspiracy and the Jameson Raid, 46-48, 49
  National Sentiment, 49
  The Cry of Disloyalty, 51
  The Transvaal to be humiliated, 51
  The Suzerainty Question revived, 52 _et seq._
  Appeal for Arbitration, 53-60
  Uitlander Grievances, 60-61, 70-88
  Reply to Mr. Chamberlain, 109
  The Industrial Commission, 61
  The Dynamite Concession, 61, 62-63
  The Netherlands Railway Co., 61, 63
  Import Duties, 61, 63
  Liquor Law, 61, 64-65
  Gold Thefts, 61, 64
  The South African League, 66-81
  The Lombard Affair, 70-73
  The Edgar Case, 70, 73-77
  The Amphitheatre Occurrence, 70, 77-81
  Equal Political Rights, 83
  The Franchise, 84-85, 86
  Bloemfontein Conference, 85
  Attitude of Sir Alfred Milner, 52, 86
  Bad Faith of the British Government, 87-88
  Final Dispatch of State Secretary Reitz, 127
  Conclusion, 89-98

Trek into Natal in 1836, 10-13

Trichardt Trek, 12, 23


Uitlanders, see under Transvaal

Umbeline, Zulu Chief, 28


Warden, Major, 18

Waterboer, (Chief), 26

Wolseley, Lord, quoted, 27


Zululand and the Zulus:
  Dingaan and the Boer Trek into Natal, 3
  Secoecoeni, Zulu Chief, 27, 30
  The Zulus and the Transvaal, 27-28
  The Zulu War, 28