^^^XX^^^ i 
 
 ^ 
 
 f. 
 
 LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GtllFORNU 
 
 LIBRI 
 
 
 %: 
 
 LIBRARY OF THE UNiVERSiTY OF GALIFORNiA 
 
 LIBR) 
 
 i 
 
<>.. 
 
 
 a 
 
 m^M^^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 'litSA" 
 
 '"^% 
 
 1 
 
 \ 
 
 ^\D 
 
 ir ntiiFiinNii ili^RiRr HF THF UNIVERSIT' 
 
 ,i^ 
 
 jol] 
 
 _>^ CO V^ 
 
 
 ''^ fMiicnukiin LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSIT 
 
 --rv^/J 
 
 \w>-Ses^' 
 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 witii funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 littp://www.arcliive.org/details/angloboerconflicOOirelricli 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 Its History tif Causes 
 
Each of the following volumes^ issued in 
 uniform style^ aims to present a brief concise^ 
 and accurate account of some contemporary 
 question. 
 
 The Dreyfus Story . . . Price 50 cts. 
 By Richard W. Hale. 
 
 The Territorial Acquisitions 
 OF the United States : An 
 Historical Review .... Price 50 cts. 
 By Edward Bicknell. 
 
 The Anglo-Boer Conflict: Its 
 
 History and Causes . . . Price 75 cts. 
 By Alleyne Ireland. 
 
 Small, Maynard & Company 
 
 Publishers 
 
 Boston 
 
THE 
 
 ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 Its History and Causes 
 
 ALLEYNE IRELAND 
 
 II 
 
 Author of Tropical Colonisation, etc. 
 
 BOSTON 
 
 SMALL, MAYNARD & COMPANY 
 1900 
 
Copyright l8g^^ ipoo^ by 
 Small^ Maynard Iff Co/ripany 
 
 ( Incorporated ) 
 
 Entered at Stationers^ Hall 
 
 First Edition, January y igoo 
 Second Edition, February, igoo 
 Third Edition, March, igoo 
 
 Press of 
 George H, Ellis, Boston, U.S.J. 
 
Vouchsafe to those that have not read the story, 
 That I may prompt them: and of such as have, 
 I humbly pray them to admit the excuse 
 Of time, of numbers, and due course of things. 
 Which cannot in their huge and proper life 
 Be here presented. 
 
 Shakespeare, Henry V. 
 
 82760 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 There is no lack of excellent books relat- 
 ing to South Africa, and the present volume 
 is not intended for those who have the leisure 
 and the inclination to gain their knowledge 
 of the causes of the Anglo-Boer conflict by 
 reading some score of bulky works written 
 by historians and travellers. 
 
 My object is to provide a brief and accu- 
 rate account of the events which have led 
 up to the war, for the use of those who, whilst 
 feeling an interest in the situation, are unable 
 to go over all the ground covered by the 
 many writers on the subject and by the very 
 extensive official documents of the case. 
 
 During the past twelve years I have spent 
 most of my time in the British Colonies, and 
 during that period I have devoted myself to 
 the study of British Colonisation in its his- 
 torical, political, and economic aspects. The 
 kind reception afforded by the public and by 
 the press to my recent volume on " Tropical 
 Colonisation ** has convinced me that the 
 American people are anxious to know some- 
 thing of England's work as a colonising 
 power, and I venture therefore to hope that 
 the present narrative of one of the most diffi- 
 
PREFACE 
 
 cult problems of British Imperial policy may 
 prove of some interest. 
 
 For the convenience of the reader I have 
 added to this work, in the form of an appen- 
 dix, a list of the principal books and maga- 
 zine articles which I have consulted, other 
 than official publications. I am indebted to 
 the editor of the Atlantic Monthly for his 
 courteous permission to use in this book por- 
 tions of my article on " Briton and Boer in 
 South Africa," which appeared in the Decem- 
 ber number of that periodical. 
 
 ALLEYNE IRELAND. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Chapter I. page 
 
 The Story of the Transvaal to the Year 1852 . 3 
 
 Chapter II. 
 The First Republican Period, 1852-77 ... 13 
 
 Chapter III. 
 
 The British Annexation in 1 877. The Con- 
 ventions of 1 88 1 and 1884. The Suzerainty, 23 
 
 Chapter IV. 
 The Grievances of the Uitlanders ::4 
 
 Chapter V. 
 The Jameson Raid <yi 
 
 Chapter VI. 
 
 The Bloomfontein Conference and Subsequent 
 
 Negotiations 119 
 
 . Appendix i37 
 
 IX 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
UNIVERSITY 
 
 THEV^califoSS 
 ANGLO-BOER CONFfifCT. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 It would be difficult to overestimate the 
 importance of the conflict now raging in 
 South Africa between the British and the 
 Boers. It is not too much to say that on 
 the issue of the conflict depends the future 
 of the British Empire. Rightly or wrongly, 
 England conceived that her subjects in the 
 Transvaal had been compelled to submit to 
 ill-treatment so great, so deliberate, and so 
 long continued that it was impossible to re- 
 frain any longer from interference unless the 
 proud boast Civis Britannicus sum was to be- 
 come a jest and a by-word. 
 
 The immediate question to be decided in 
 South Africa is whether the British Empire 
 is strong enough to protect its citizens in 
 foreign lands from injustice and oppression. 
 Failure to carry the war to a successful issue 
 would prove that the Empire does not pos- 
 sess this power ; and the result would be that 
 the whole magnificent edifice of British Im- 
 perialism would fall to the ground, like a 
 child's house of cards. 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 In order to understand the events which 
 are occurring in South Africa, it is not 
 enough to examine the terms of the Con- 
 ventions between Great Britain and the 
 Transvaal, and to limit one's inquiry to the 
 question as to whether these terms have 
 been observed. Although the results of 
 such an inquiry might be sufficient to guide 
 the action of statesmen, the student of poli- 
 tics requires more than this. He would 
 read the statesman's despatch in the light of 
 historic evolution. 
 
 For the purpose of a brief review of the 
 present situation, it is convenient to divide 
 the history of South Africa into six pe- 
 riods : (i) From the final British occupation 
 of the Cape Colony in 1 8 14 to 1 85 2, the year 
 in which the Transvaal became a separate 
 State. (2) From 1852 to 1877, the year in 
 which England resumed sovereignty over the 
 Transvaal. (3) The revolt of 1880 and the 
 Conventions of 1881 and 1884. (4) The 
 growth of the Uitlander grievances since 
 the re-erection of the Transvaal in 1881. 
 (5) The Jameson raid. (6) The interfer- 
 ence of Great Britain in order to secure 
 redress for the Uitlander grievances. 
 
 At the outbreak of war between France 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 and England in 1803, Cape Colony be- 
 longed to the Netherlands. In 1806 Louis 
 Napoleon was made king of the Netherlands ; 
 and in the same year England attacked the 
 Cape, as it was then a French possession. 
 The Colony capitulated on Jan. 10, 1806. 
 The British occupation was made perma- 
 nent by a Convention, signed in 18 14, be- 
 tween Great Britain and the Netherlands, 
 by the terms of which England paid thirty 
 million dollars for the cession of the Cape 
 Colony and of the Dutch colonies of Deme- 
 rara, Berbice, and Essequibo, which now 
 form the colony of British Guiana. 
 
 It was hoped that the Dutch and the 
 English in the Cape Colony would live to- 
 gether in friendly intercourse, and that 
 eventually, by intermarriage, a fusion of the 
 two races would be effected. This hope 
 was doomed to disappointment ; for an an- 
 tagonism gradually developed between the old 
 and the new colonists, which led to the es- 
 tablishment of two Republics beyond the 
 border of the Colony. The first step toward 
 the formation of these Republics was the 
 emigration during 1836 and 1837 of about 
 eight thousand Dutch farmers from the Cape 
 Colony, — a movement which is generally 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 referred to as the Great Trek. These men 
 went out of the Colony, and established 
 themselves in the vast hinterland. It is 
 most important to understand the causes 
 which led to the Great Trek. They were 
 the misguided zeal of the English missiona- 
 ries, the abolition of slavery with the safe- 
 guarding of the natives' interests, and, lastly, 
 what Canon Knox Little describes as " Eng- 
 land's fatuous policy of vacillation, betrayal, 
 friction, irritation, postponing, changing, 
 doing, and undoing." 
 
 The troubles with the missionaries began 
 even before the Colony was ceded to Eng- 
 land. In 1811 a certain Mr. Read, of the 
 London Missionary Society, wrote a letter, 
 which was widely circulated in England, in 
 which he asserted that over one hundred 
 murders of natives by the Dutch had been 
 brought to his notice in his district, and that 
 the Governor of the Colony remained deaf to 
 the cry for justice. An inquiry was ordered 
 by the Government, and every facility was 
 given the natives for proving Mr. Read's 
 charges. After throwing the whole district 
 into confusion by summoning over a thou- 
 sand witnesses, many of whom were under 
 arms on the frontier in expectation of a Kosa 
 
TROUBLES WITH MISSIONARIES 
 
 raid, the Circuit Court found that the 
 charges were grossly exaggerated. The net 
 result was the sending up for trial of five 
 Dutchmen. George McCall Theal, in his 
 History of South Africa, says in regard to 
 this affair : " The Black Circuit, as it was 
 called, produced a lasting impression amongst 
 the Dutch. It was no use telling the peo- 
 ple that the trials had shown the missionaries 
 to have been the dupes of idle story-tellers. 
 The extraordinary efforts made to search for 
 cases and to conduct the prosecutions 
 appeared in their eyes as a fixed determina- 
 tion on the part of the English authorities 
 to punish them, if by any means a pretext 
 could be found. As for the missionaries 
 of the London Society, from that time they 
 were held by the frontier colonists to be 
 slanderers and public enemies." That the 
 actions of the missionaries really influenced 
 the Dutch in their determination to leave the 
 Colony is shown by a manifesto published 
 by Pieter Retief, one of the most prominent 
 trekkers, stating why British rule was no 
 longer endurable. The fourth paragraph of 
 the manifesto says : " We complain of the 
 unjustifiable odium which has been cast 
 upon us by interested and dishonest persons, 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 under the name of religion, whose testimony 
 is believed in England to the exclusion of 
 all evidence in our favour; and we can fore- 
 see, as the result of this prejudice, nothing 
 but the total ruin of the country." 
 
 But a more important cause of discontent 
 lay in the policy of protection of native in- 
 terests, which was vigorously enforced by 
 the British authorities. As early as 1815 
 the ill-treatment of the natives by the Dutch 
 produced great friction. In that year a com- 
 plaint was laid before a magistrate against 
 one Frederik Bezuidenhout, for assault on 
 a native servant. A summons to appear 
 was disregarded, and a warrant was issued 
 for the man's arrest. Every effort was made 
 to effect the arrest peaceably ; but the man 
 surrounded himself with a band of his 
 friends, and fired on the party detailed to 
 make the arrest. A fight ensued, in which 
 Bezuidenhout was killed and thirty-nine of 
 his comrades were arrested. They were 
 tried by jury before the High Court, and five 
 of them were condemned to death. This 
 affair, in which the British authorities are 
 supposed to have acted with unnecessary 
 severity, is constantly recited by the Boers at 
 public meetings, in order to inflame the peo- 
 
THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY 
 
 pie against England. Referring to this mat- 
 ter in his Oom Paul's People^ Mr. Howard 
 C. Hillegas says, " The story of this event 
 in the Boer history is as familiar to the Dutch 
 school-boy as that of the Boston Tea Party 
 is to the American lad, and its repetition 
 never fails to arouse a Boer audience to the 
 highest degree of anger." 
 
 As a matter of fact, the blame for this 
 affair rests entirely with the Dutch official 
 who was charged with the carrying out of 
 the penalty. That official, the local Field- 
 cornet, had in his pocket at the time of the 
 execution the Governor's order for the par- 
 don of the prisoners. He suppressed it from 
 motives of personal spite ; and afterwards, 
 fearing detection, he committed suicide. 
 
 I now pass to a question which is at the 
 bottom of a great deal of the ill-feeling be- 
 tween the Dutch and the English, — the 
 abolition of slavery. The Emancipation Act 
 came into force in Cape Colony on Dec. I, 
 1834, the number of slaves in the Colony at 
 that time being about forty thousand, mostly 
 in the hands of the Dutch. The value of 
 these slaves was three million pounds sterl- 
 ing, but the Imperial Government awarded 
 only a million and a quarter as compensation. 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 In this respect the Dutch slaveholders were 
 no worse off than the West Indian slave- 
 holders, but they undoubtedly had a griev- 
 ance in the fact that the compensation was 
 made payable in London. 
 
 George McCall Theal, the historian of 
 South Africa, says that the abolition of 
 slavery had little to do with the Great Trek ; 
 but in this opinion he stands alone amongst 
 writers on South African history. It is diffi- 
 cult, indeed, to reconcile his view with the 
 terms in which he describes the effect of 
 abolition on the minds of the Dutch. He 
 says : " It is not easy to bring home to the 
 mind the wide-spread misery that was occa- 
 sioned by the confiscation of two millions' 
 worth of property in a small and poor com- 
 munity like that of the Cape in 1835. 
 There were to be seen families reduced from 
 affluence to want, widows and orphans made 
 destitute, poverty and anxiety brought into 
 hundreds of homes." Pieter Retief stated 
 in his manifesto that the abolition of slavery 
 was one of the reasons why his band was 
 leaving the Colony. Another powerful cause 
 of discontent was the attitude of the Colonial 
 Office in regard to the Kaffir war of 1834-35. 
 On Dec. 21, 1834, twelve thousand armed 
 
KAFFIR WAR OF 1834 
 
 Kaffirs raided the Colony ; and it was only 
 after severe fighting that the Dutch farmers 
 succeeded in driving them back over the Kei 
 River. Sir Benjamin D'Urban, Governor of 
 the Colony, extended the boundary of the 
 Colony to the Kei River, in the hope that 
 the strong natural barrier which it afforded 
 would keep the two races from further con- 
 flict. Unfortunately, Lord Glenelg, Secre- 
 tary of State for the Colonial and War 
 Departments, entirely misunderstanding the 
 situation, ordered the restoration of the terri- 
 tory to the Kaffirs. This action, which 
 finds a parallel in more recent South African 
 history, had the most far-reaching results. 
 It disheartened the Boers who had shed their 
 blood in upholding what they believed to 
 be the honour of England, and at the same 
 time encouraged the Kaffirs to further out- 
 rages. 
 
 Thoroughly disgusted with British rule, 
 about eight thousand Boers left the Colony ; 
 and the Great Trek was accomplished. If 
 ever men had reason to turn their backs on 
 an unjust and unfaithful government, the 
 Boers had, when, after losing their property 
 and after being deprived of the fruits of 
 victory, they inspanned their oxen and went 
 out into the wilderness. 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 I cannot refer here to the early adventures 
 of the trekkers. Suffice it to say that, after 
 much fighting with the natives, and a great 
 deal of vacillation on the part of the British 
 Government, the independence of the Trans- 
 vaal Boers was recognized by the Sand River 
 Convention in 1852, and the Orange Free 
 State was established as an independent Re- 
 public in 1854. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 The story of the Transvaal from 1852 to 
 1877 is one of continual strife and discord. 
 The Boers were divided amongst themselves, 
 and formed four small Republics, which did 
 little but quarrel with one another over re- 
 ligious and political questions. Occasionally 
 they combined to fight the natives, with 
 whom they never succeeded in establishing 
 friendly relations. In 1857 ^^^ internal 
 dissensions were varied by a raid into the 
 Orange Free State. One of the objects of 
 the raid was to compel the Free State to 
 enter into confederation with the Transvaal j 
 and one of the officers in command of the 
 raiding party was S. J. P. Kruger, now Presi- 
 dent of the Transvaal. The raiding party 
 found itself face to face with a large body of 
 armed Free State burghers, and Kruger was 
 sent in with a flag of truce to seek terms. 
 The Orange Free State would not hear of 
 confederation with the Transvaal, but yielded 
 on one point, which is of great interest at 
 the present time. This point is contained 
 in Article 7 of the Treaty concluded on that 
 occasion, which runs, *' The deputies of the 
 Orange Free State promise to grant and 
 
 '3 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 extend within their State the same rights and 
 privileges to the burghers and subjects of the 
 South African Republic as shall be afforded 
 to those of the Cape of Good Hope and 
 Natal." 
 
 So it is seen that in 1857 Kruger was 
 prepared to exact by force of arms from the 
 Orange Free State the political rights of 
 Transvaal Uitlanders in the sister Republic. 
 
 At length matters came to such a pass in 
 the Transvaal that the peace of the whole 
 of South Africa was threatened. Notwith- 
 standing an express agreement to the con- 
 trary in the Sand River Convention, the 
 Boers persistently practised slavery, and 
 made a habit of raiding friendly native kraals 
 for the purpose of carrying off the women 
 and children. Since this has been repeatedly 
 denied during the past few months, I think it 
 well to put the fact beyond dispute by quot- 
 ing from four independent sources. British 
 Blue Book C. 1776, published in 1877, ^^Y^ ' 
 " Slavery has occurred not only here and 
 there in isolated cases, but as an unbroken 
 practice has been one of the peculiar institu- 
 tions of the country. It has been at the root 
 of most of its wars." Dr. Nachtigal, of the 
 Berlin Missionary Society, wrote to Presi- 
 14 
 
( TJNIVEB 
 SLAVERY IN TRANSVAAL Vp/^o 
 dent Burgers, of the Transvaal, in 1875^ ' '"" 
 " If I am asked to say conscientiously 
 whether such slavery has existed since 1852, 
 and been recognised and permitted by the 
 government, I must answer in the affirma- 
 tive." A Dutch clergyman named P. Huet, 
 in a volume published in 1869 entitled Het 
 Afrikaamche Repuhliek^ says : " Till their 
 twenty-second year they [the natives] are 
 apprenticed. All this time they have to 
 serve without payment. It is slavery in the 
 fullest sense of the word." In 1876, one 
 year before the annexation, Khame, chief of 
 the Bagamangwato, sent a petition to Queen 
 Victoria. It ran in part : " I, Khame, King 
 of the Bagamangwato, greet Victoria, the 
 Great Queen of the English people. I ask 
 Her Majesty to pity me, and to hear what I 
 write quickly. The Boers are coming into 
 my country, and I do not like them. . . . 
 They sell us and our children. The custom 
 of the Boers has always been to cause people 
 to be sold, and to-day they are still selling 
 people." This fourfold testimony seems to 
 leave little room for doubt. 
 
 But what concerned England very nearly 
 was the constant danger of the wars in the 
 Transvaal spreading to British territory, — 
 
 15 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 a danger which increased from year to year, 
 as the Republic sank deeper into financial em- 
 barrassment. The Boers had never been 
 willing to pay taxes, and at last even the 
 money for current expenses was not forth- 
 coming. In view of these facts the British 
 Government sent out Sir Theophilus Shep- 
 stone, in 1876, to visk the Transvaal and 
 inquire into its condition. He was author- 
 ised to annex the Transvaal, if he found 
 such a course necessary in the interests of 
 peace and safety, provided the inhabitants 
 or a sufficient number of the legislature were 
 willing. Sir Theophilus Shepstone entered 
 the Transvaal with the knowledge of Presi- 
 dent Burgers, and proceeded to Pretoria. 
 He was accompanied by twenty-five mounted 
 police, the only force he had within a 
 month's march of him during the whole 
 period of his stay, and at the time he issued 
 the proclamation annexing the country. To 
 assert that the Transvaal was forcibly an- 
 nexed is, in the face of these facts, absurd. 
 Shepstone took eighteen days to reach Pre- 
 toria. His progress was marked by the 
 presentation of numbers of addresses and 
 memorials, from Dutch, English, and na- 
 tives, praying him to take over the country. 
 16 
 
THE ANNEXATION 
 
 But he was not prepared to do this until he 
 had satisfied himself that the needed reforms 
 could not be carried out by the Dutch them- 
 selves without British aid. 
 
 After spending three months in the coun- 
 try, he sent home a despatch, dated March 
 6, 1877, in which he thus described the con- 
 dition of the Republic : " It was patent to 
 every observer that the government was 
 powerless to control either its white citizens 
 or its native subjects ; that it was incapable 
 of enforcing its laws or of collecting its 
 taxes ; that the salaries of officials had been, 
 and are, four months in arrears ; that the white 
 inhabitants had become split into factions; 
 that the large native population within the 
 boundaries of the State ignore its authority 
 and laws ; and that the powerful Zulu king, 
 Cetawayo, is anxious to seize the first oppor- 
 tunity of attacking a country the conduct of 
 whose warriors has convinced him that it 
 can be easily conquered by his clamouring 
 regiments." 
 
 But he was not willing to recommend an- 
 nexation, if the people of the country were 
 ready to undertake reforms. In fact. Presi- 
 dent Burgers submitted to Shepstone a new 
 constitution so satisfactory that he declared 
 
I HE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 " he would abandon his design of annexation 
 if the Volksraad would adopt these measures, 
 and the country be willing to submit to them 
 and carry them out." The Volksraad, how- 
 ever, refused to adopt the new constitution. 
 Whereupon Burgers proclaimed it on his own 
 responsibility, — an act which was immedi- 
 ately condemned by the Executive Council. 
 Then President Burgers advised the Volks- 
 raad to accept the British annexation. His 
 language was unmistakable. Speaking on 
 March 3, 1877, before the Raad, he said : " I 
 would rather be a policeman under a strong 
 government than the president of such a 
 State. It is you — you members of the 
 Raad and the Boers — who have lost the 
 country, who have sold your independence 
 ' for a soupe [a drink] . You have ill-treated 
 the natives, you have shot them down, you 
 have sold them into slavery ; and now you 
 have to pay the penalty. We should delude 
 ourselves by entertaining the hope that mat- 
 ters would mend by and by. It would only 
 be self-deceit. I tell you openly, matters 
 are as bad as they ever can be : they cannot 
 be worse. These are bitter truths, and 
 people may perhaps turn their backs on me ; 
 but, then, I shall have the consolation of hav- 
 18 
 
THE ANNEXATION 
 
 ing done my duty. Whence has arisen that 
 urgency to make an appeal for interference 
 elsewhere ? Has that appeal been made 
 only by enemies of the State ? Oh, no, 
 gentlemen. It has arisen from real griev- 
 ances. Our people have degenerated from 
 their former position ; they have become de- 
 moralised ; they are not what they ought to 
 be. To-day a bill for ;^i,ioo was laid be- 
 fore me for signature ; but I would sooner 
 have cut ofF my right hand than have signed 
 that paper, for I have not the slightest 
 ground to expect that, when that bill be- 
 comes due, there will be a penny to pay it 
 with." 
 
 Continuing, President Burgers said that 
 to take up arms and fight was nonsense. 
 Let them make the best of the situation, and 
 get the best terms they possibly could. Let 
 them agree to join their hands to those of 
 their brethren in the south, and then from 
 the Cape to the Zambesi there would be 
 one great people. Yes, there was some- 
 thing grand in that, — grander even than 
 their idea of a Republic, — something which 
 ministered to their national feeling. And 
 would this be so miserable ? Yes, this 
 would be miserable for those who would not 
 
 19 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 be under the law, for the rebel and the revo- 
 lutionist, but welfare and prosperity for the 
 men of law and order. They must not 
 underrate their real and many difficulties. 
 He could point to the south-western border, 
 the Zulu, the gold fields, and other questions, 
 and show them that it was their duty to 
 come to an arrangement with the British 
 Government and to do so in a bold and 
 manly manner. 
 
 After showing President Burgers the 
 Proclamation which he proposed to issue, 
 and after arranging that the Boer govern- 
 ment should be allowed to enter a formal 
 protest against the proceedings, for the sake 
 of appearances. Sir Theophilus Shepstone 
 annexed the country to the British Crown 
 on April 12, 1877. 
 
 The previous day he sent a message to 
 Cetawayo, informing him of the approaching 
 change and warning him against any act of 
 violence. The Zulu king sent the follow- 
 ing reply: "I thank my father Somtseu 
 [Shepstone] for his message. I am glad that 
 he has sent it, because the Dutch have tired 
 me out ; and I intended to fight them once, 
 only once, and to drive them over the Vaal. 
 You see my impis are gathered. It was to 
 
EFFECTS OF ANNEXATION 
 
 fight the Dutch I called them together. 
 Now I will send them back to their houses." 
 
 The formal protest of the Boer Executive 
 Council was received. That it was merely 
 formal is proved by the fact that, with the 
 exception of Joubert, every member served 
 under the new government. S. J. P. Krugcr 
 held office for some months, and then re- 
 signed, as he was refused an increase of 
 salary for which he had applied. The ac- 
 counts show, however, that he drew his pay 
 as a member of the Executive Council for 
 eight months after the annexation. 
 
 "The effect of annexation," says Mr. J. P. 
 Fitzpatrick in his remarkable volume The 
 Transvaal from Within " was to start the 
 wells of plenty bubbling with British gold. 
 The country's debts were paid. Secocoeni 
 and Cetawayo would be dealt with, and the 
 responsibility for all things was on other and 
 broader shoulders. With the revival of 
 trade, and the removal of responsibilities and 
 burdens, came time to think and to talk. 
 The wave of the magician's wand looked so 
 very simple that the price began to seem 
 heavy. The eaten bread was forgotten. The 
 dangers and difficulties that were passed were 
 of small account now that they were past. 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 And so the men who had remained passive, 
 and recorded formal protests when they 
 should have resisted and taken steps to show 
 that they were in earnest, began their repeal 
 agitation. All the benefits which the Boers 
 hoped from the annexation had now been 
 reaped. Their pressing needs were relieved. 
 Their debts had been paid, their trade and 
 credit restored, their enemies were being 
 dealt with. Repeal would rob them of 
 none of these : they would, in fact, eat the'fr 
 cake, and still have it.*' 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 There can be no doubt whatever that at 
 the time of the annexation of the Transvaal, 
 in 1877, the majority of the Boers were 
 willing, and that many of them were anxious, 
 to be taken under British rule. The only 
 element of discord was a small band of 
 ultra-conservatives, who, after precipitating 
 the annexation by fostering internal strife, 
 were now ready, their tactics having over- 
 thrown Burgers, to undertake an anti-Brit- 
 ish agitation in the interest of Kruger's 
 candidature for the Presidency, the success 
 of which meant the retrocession of the 
 country from the British flag. 
 
 Nothing would have come of this move- 
 ment, had it not been for the incredible folly 
 of the British Government. At a time when 
 it was, above all things, necessary to keep 
 faith with the Boers, when a firm adherence 
 to the promises contained in the proclama- 
 tion of Sir Theophilus Shepstone would have 
 strengthened the pro-British feeling and at 
 the same time have cut the ground from 
 under the feet of the agitators, a policy was 
 pursued which, though free from that depth 
 of cowardice which marked the actions of 
 
 23 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 the Gladstone administration in 1881, was 
 so thoroughly ill-advised that we can only 
 wonder that, when the revolt broke out in 
 1880, there were still to be found in the 
 country a considerable number of men who 
 adhered to the British. 
 
 The first mistake was in allowing an un- 
 necessary delay in establishing an electoral 
 government. This was followed by the re- 
 call of Shepstone, who was liked and re- 
 spected by the Boers, on the ground that his 
 expenditure was excessive, and the appoint- 
 ment of Colonel Lanyon in his place. Lan- 
 yon possessed those excellent qualities which 
 so well befit a soldier, but which are unsuit- 
 able for administrative work ; and his pre- 
 cise and rigourous methods made him most 
 unpopular with the Boers. Everything 
 worked well for Kruger and his party; for 
 Sir Bartle Frere, the one man who, in the 
 absence of Shepstone, might have set matters 
 right, was recalled, and his duties in the 
 Transvaal were handed over to Sir Garnet 
 Wolseley. 
 
 During the agitation which led to the re- 
 volt of 1880 the pro-British Boers, becom- 
 ing anxious at the preparations going on 
 around them, sought to be reassured by the 
 
 24 
 
ANNEXATION TO BE FINAL 
 
 British Government that the annexation 
 would not be revoked. This assurance was 
 repeatedly given in the most solemn and 
 authoritative manner. Sir Garnet Wolseley 
 was authorised by the British Cabinet to 
 make the following proclamation : " I do 
 proclaim and make known, in the name and 
 on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, that it 
 is the will and determination of Her Majesty's 
 Government that this Transvaal territory 
 shall be and shall continue to be forever an 
 integral portion of Her Majesty's dominions." 
 On another occasion Sir Garnet Wolseley 
 said, " So long as the sun shines, the Trans- 
 vaal will remain British territory." This 
 was confirmed by Sir Michael Hicks Beach, 
 Secretary of State for the Colonies, who, on 
 being informed that certain persons enter- 
 tained " the false and dangerous idea that 
 Her Majesty was not resolved to maintain 
 Her sovereignty over this territory," tele- 
 graphed to Sir Garnet Wolseley, "You may 
 fully confirm explicit statements made from 
 time to time as to inability of Her Majesty's 
 Government to entertain any proposal for 
 withdrawal of Queen's sovereignty." 
 
 One important voice was raised against 
 this view. Mr. Gladstone, speaking during 
 
 25 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 his Midlothian campaign in March, 1880, 
 said, " If those acquisitions [Cyprus and 
 the Transvaal] were as valuable as they are 
 valueless, I would repudiate them, because 
 they were obtained by means dishonourable 
 to the character of this country." 
 
 Less than two months after the delivery 
 of this speech Gladstone came into power. 
 A month later he received from Messrs. 
 Kruger and Joubert a letter, in which they 
 prayed that he would give effect to the sen- 
 timents he had expressed so unequivocally, 
 by restoring the independence of the Trans- 
 vaal. Mr. Gladstone replied : " It is un- 
 doubtedly a matter for much regret that it 
 should, since the annexation, have appeared 
 that so large a number of the population of 
 Dutch origin in the Transvaal are opposed 
 to the annexation of that territory ; but it is 
 impossible now to consider that question as 
 if it were presented for the first time. Look- 
 ing at all the circumstances, our judgment is 
 that the Queen cannot be advised to relin- 
 quish her sovereignty over the Transvaal." 
 From this letter the loyalist party in the 
 Transvaal took heart of grace. Things were 
 evidently on a permanent basis, when even 
 the leading advocate for repudiation declared 
 26 
 
BOER WAR OF 1880-81 
 
 his deliberate opinion that the Transvaal 
 must remain British territory. 
 
 But on Dec. 13, 1880, Kruger and his 
 associates proclaimed the South African Re- 
 public. The Boer war followed, which 
 lasted until March, 1881. The Boers 
 fought with great bravery, and the British 
 forces were defeated in several small engage- 
 ments. Large British re-enforcements were 
 on the way, and the Boers would soon have 
 been outnumbered and overmatched, when 
 Gladstone sent out to say that, if the Boers 
 would lay down their arms, they should be 
 accorded complete self-government, subject 
 to British suzerainty. What had been re- 
 fused by Gladstone to petition and entreaty 
 was to be given as the reward of rebellion. 
 
 The excellent fighting record of the Boers 
 in the war was marred by at least one inci- 
 dent of the grossest treachery. The Boers 
 captured two British officers. Captains Lam- 
 bert and Elliott. They were given the 
 choice of remaining prisoners during the war 
 or of leaving the country at once on parole. 
 They decided to leave the country, pledging 
 themselves not to bear arms against the 
 Transvaal. Commandant General Joubert 
 gave them a pass and provided them with an 
 27 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 escort as far as the border. The escort 
 conducted them to the junction of the Vaal 
 and Klip Rivers, where it was impossible to 
 cross with the horses and cart, and then dis- 
 appeared. Captain Lambert then suggested 
 that they should follow the Vaal until they 
 came to a place where they could cross. 
 This plan was followed for a couple of days, 
 when the officers were stopped by a Boer 
 patrol, who handed them a letter from the 
 State Secretary of the Republic, expressing 
 surprise that they had not kept their word 
 and left the country, and directing them to 
 follow the patrol, who would show them the 
 nearest ford. The rest of the story I give 
 in the words of Captain Lambert's report 
 to General Colley : *' We explained that 
 we should reply to the letter, and request 
 them to take it to their government, and 
 were prepared to go with them at once. 
 They took us back to a farm-house, where 
 we were told to wait until they fetched their 
 Commandant, who arrived about 6 p.m., and 
 repeated to us the same that was contained 
 in our letter of that day. We told him that 
 we were ready to explain matters, and re- 
 quested him to take our answer back to 
 camp. He then ordered us to start at once 
 28 
 
BOER WAR OF 1 880-81 
 
 for the drift. I asked him, as it was then 
 getting dark, if we 'could start early next 
 morning ; but he refused. So we started, he 
 having said we should cross at Spencer's, 
 being closest. As we left the farm-house, I 
 pointed out to him that we were going in 
 the wrong direction ; but he said, *- Never 
 mind : come on across a drift close at hand.' 
 When we got opposite it, he kept straight 
 on. I called to him, and said that this was 
 where we were to cross. His reply was, 
 ' Come on ! ' I then said to Captain Elliott, 
 ^ They intend taking us back to Pretoria,' 
 distant some forty miles. Suddenly the 
 escort wheeled sharp down to the river, 
 stopped, and, pointing to the banks, said : 
 ' There is the drift. Cross ! ' I drove my 
 horses into the river, when they immediately 
 fell. Lifted them, and drove on about five or 
 six yards, when we fell into a hole. Got 
 them out with difficulty, and advanced an- 
 other yard, when we got stuck against a rock. 
 The current was now so strong and drift 
 deep, my cart was overturned, and water 
 rushed over the seat. I called out to the 
 Commandant on the bank that we were 
 stuck, and to send assistance, or might we 
 return, to which he replied, ^ If you do, we 
 29 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 will shoot you.' I then tried, but failed, to 
 get the horses to move. Turning to Cap- 
 tain Elliott, who was sitting beside me, I 
 said 'We must swim for it,' and asked 
 could he swim, to which he replied, 'Yes.' 
 I said, ' If you can't, I will stick to you ; for 
 I can.' While we were holding this conver- 
 sation, a volley from the bank, ten or fifteen 
 yards off, was fired into us, the bullets pass- 
 ing through the tent of my cart, one of which 
 must have mortally wounded poor Elliott, 
 who only uttered the single word ' Oh ! ' 
 and fell headlong into the river from the 
 carriage. I immediately sprang in after him, 
 but was swept down the river under the 
 current some yards. On gaining the surface 
 of the water, I could see nothing of Elliott ; 
 but I called out his name twice, but received 
 no answer. Immediately another volley was 
 fired at me, making the water hiss around 
 where the bullets struck. I now struck out 
 for the opposite bank, which I reached with 
 difficulty in about ten minutes ; but, as it 
 was deep black mud, on landing I stuck 
 fast, but eventually reached the top of the 
 bank, and ran for about two hundred yards 
 under a heavy fire the whole time." 
 
 The natives in and around the Transvaal 
 
 30 
 
POSITION OF LOYALISTS 
 
 had been eager to fight for the British, but 
 had been prevented from doing so by the 
 British authorities, who felt that the general 
 interests of peace in South Africa would thus 
 be imperilled. A large number of loyal 
 Boers and British fought with the regular 
 troops, placing their faith in the repeated 
 assurances of the British Government that 
 under no circumstances would the Trans- 
 vaal be given up. The position of these 
 loyalists after the surrender was deplorable. 
 Their grievances were eloquently set forth 
 by Mr. C. K. White, President of the Com- 
 mittee of Loyal Inhabitants of the Trans- 
 vaal, who wrote to Mr. Gladstone : " I, for 
 one, opposed the Government strenuously 
 on one occasion, at least ; but when the 
 sword was drawn, and it came to being an 
 enemy or loyal, we all of us came to the 
 front and strove to do our duty, in full de- 
 pendence on the pledged and, as we hoped, 
 the inviolate word of England. And now it 
 is very bitter for us to find that we trusted 
 in vain ; that, notwithstanding our sufferings 
 and privations, in which our wives and chil- 
 dren had to bear their share, we are to be 
 dealt with as clamorous claimants, and told 
 that we are too pronounced in our views. 
 
 31 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 If, sir, you had seen, as I have seen, promising 
 young citizens of Pretoria dying of wounds 
 received for their country ; if you had seen 
 the privations and discomforts which delicate 
 women and children bore without murmuring 
 for upwards of three months ; if you had seen 
 strong men crying like children at the cruel 
 and undeserved desertion of England ; and if 
 you had invested your all on the strength of 
 the word of England, and now saw yourself 
 beggared by the act of the country in which 
 you trusted, you would, sir, I think, be ' pro- 
 nounced.' " It is not recorded that Glad- 
 stone replied to this letter. 
 
 Nothing was gained by the surrender but 
 national dishonour. The rebels had already 
 been betrayed by Mr. Gladstone ; and they 
 saw, therefore, only cowardice where they 
 were expected to see magnanimity. The 
 loyalists, on the other hand, and with them 
 the natives, were handed over to their ene- 
 mies, with nothing to remember but the de- 
 liberate breaking of those most solemn and 
 emphatic pledges which had been their stay 
 and comfort during the trials of the rebel- 
 lion. Either there should have been no 
 fighting or more fighting. The idea was 
 well expressed by Lord Cairns. Speaking in 
 
 32 
 
THE CONVENTION OF 1881 
 
 the House of Lords, he said : " I want to 
 know what we have been fighting aboutc 
 If this arrangement is what was intended, 
 why did you not give it at once ? Why did 
 you spend the blood and treasure of the 
 country like water, only to give, at the end, 
 what you had intended to give at the begin- 
 ning ? We know that there are those who 
 have lost in the Transvaal that which was 
 dearer to them than the light of their eyes. 
 They have been consoled with the reflection 
 that the brave men who died died fighting for 
 their Queen and country. Are the mourners 
 now to be told that these men were fighting 
 for a country which the Government had 
 determined to abandon, and that they were 
 fighting for a Queen who was no longer to 
 be sovereign of that country ? " 
 
 The formal instrument restoring the 
 Transvaal to the Boers was the Pretoria 
 Convention, signed and published on Aug. 
 3, 1 88 1. The Convention consists of a 
 Preamble and thirty-three Articles. The 
 Preamble runs : " Her Majesty's Commis- 
 sioners for the settlement of the Transvaal 
 territory, duly appointed as such by a Com- 
 mission passed under the Royal Sign Manual 
 and Signet, bearing date the 5th of April, 
 
 33 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 1 88 1, do hereby undertake and guarantee on 
 behalf of Her Majesty that, from and after 
 the eighth day of August, 1 88 incomplete 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 con- 
 ditions, and subject to the following reserva- 
 tions and limitations." 
 
 In other words, upon certain terms and 
 conditions, and subject to certain reservations 
 and limitations, the inhabitants of the Trans- 
 vaal were to receive complete self-govern- 
 ment, not as an independent State, but as a 
 State subject to the suzerainty of Her 
 Majesty, — in brief, as a vassal State. 
 
 It is not necessary to deal with the 
 Articles, for these were repealed by the Con- 
 vention of 1884. 
 
 The Boers took over the country on Aug. 
 8, 1 88 1, and issued a Proclamation, of which 
 the following is a part : " To all inhabi- 
 tants, without exception, we promise the pro- 
 tection of the law, and all the privileges 
 attendant thereon. We repeat solemnly that 
 our motto is, ' Unity and reconciliation.' " 
 
 During the two years following 1881 the 
 Boers became dissatisfied with the Pretoria 
 
 34 
 
THE CONVENTION OF 1881 
 
 Convention ; and finally towards the end of 
 1883 the British Government consented to 
 receive a deputation from the Transvaal, in 
 order to discuss with it the clauses of the 
 Pretoria Convention which were claimed to 
 be burdensome. The Deputation consisted 
 of Messrs. S. J. P. Kruger, S. J. Du Toit, 
 and N. J. Smit. On arrival in London the 
 Deputation sent a long letter to the Earl of 
 Derby, at that time Secretary of State for the 
 Colonies, setting forth their objections to the 
 Pretoria Convention. 
 
 The letter says : " The impracticability 
 of the Convention has appeared chiefly in the 
 following points : — 
 
 " (a) The Western Boundary, as defines 
 in Article I. 
 
 " (h) The extent of the suzerain rights re- 
 served to Her Majesty by Articles 2 and 18. 
 
 " (r) The obligation contained in Article 
 3, to previously submit for the approval of 
 Her Majesty all new regulations concerning 
 the interests of the natives within the Repub- 
 lic before they can come into force ; and 
 
 "(^) The financial settlement contained 
 in Articles 10 and 11." 
 
 (Great Britain, Accounts and Papers, 
 1884. C. 3947. P- 3-) 
 35 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 In view of the importance which the 
 question of suzerainty assumed later, it is 
 necessary to make absolutely clear the atti- 
 tude of the Transvaal Deputation. In the 
 letter from which I have quoted above, the 
 Transvaal delegates, in enlarging on their 
 objections to the extent of the suzerain 
 rights, say : " With reference to the rights 
 of the suzerain we wish to point out more 
 particularly : First. The considerable in- 
 convenience experienced by our country on 
 account of the lengthy and complicated man- 
 ner in which every communication with a 
 foreign power, however simple it may be, 
 has to be carried on. Second. The stipula- 
 tion of the Convention, according to which 
 our Government is not qualified by its own 
 authority and under its own responsibility to 
 communicate with native chiefs outside the 
 Republic, but has to employ for that purpose 
 the British Resident." (Great Britain, Ac- 
 counts and Papers, 1884. C. 3947, p. 3.) 
 
 And, further, in suggesting the drawing up 
 of a new Convention, . . . ^' the Deputation 
 venture to lay before your Lordship, candidly, 
 and without any circumlocution, the follow- 
 ing proposals : . . . 2. That in this new 
 Agreement every connection by which we are 
 
 36 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 now bound to England should not be broken, 
 but that the relation of a dependency, publict 
 juris^ in which our country now stands to the 
 British crown, may be replaced by that of two 
 contracting powers." (Great Britain, Ac- 
 counts and Papers, 1884. C. 3947, p. 5.) 
 
 It must be noted that the Transvaal Dep- 
 utation objected to the Convention of 1881 
 chiefly on four grounds, and that one of these 
 was " the extent of the suzerain rights re- 
 served to Her Majesty under Articles 2 and 
 18." 
 
 The first hint that the Deputation sought 
 not to modify the extent of the suzerain 
 power, but to abolish the suzerainty itself, is 
 contained in their letter to Lord Derby of 
 Nov. 26, 1883. This letter covered the 
 draft of the proposed new treaty, and the 
 first article ran : " It is .agreed, that Her 
 Britannic Majesty recognises and guarantees 
 by this treaty the full independence of the 
 South African Republic, with the right to 
 manage its own afl^airs, according to its own 
 laws, without any interference on the part of 
 the British Government ; it being understood 
 that this system of non-interference is bind- 
 ing on both parties." (Great Britain, Ac- 
 counts and Papers, 1884. C. 3947, p. 10.) 
 
 37 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 To this Lord Derby replied on Nov. 29, 
 1883, "The draft Treaty which you have 
 submitted is neither in form nor in substance 
 such as Her Majesty's Government could 
 adopt." . . . (Great Britain, Accounts and 
 Papers, 1884. C. 3947, p. 18.) 
 
 Then followed long discussions occupying 
 about two months on the question of boun- 
 daries ; and we do not find the suzerainty 
 referred to again until Feb. 5, 1884. On 
 that date the Deputation wrote to Lord 
 Derby : " We look forward with interest 
 to the draft of the first article of the new 
 Convention, with the map to be annexed, 
 which will be drawn up by your Lordship's 
 directions. In connection herewith, we 
 would respectfully submit to your Lordship's 
 consideration whether it would not be possi- 
 ble to have the other articles of the New 
 Convention, namely, those referring to the 
 abolition of the suzerainty and to the reduc- 
 tion to its legal proportions of the debt of 
 the Republic, simultaneously drawn up and 
 communicated to us, in order to accelerate 
 the complete settlement of the matter." 
 (Great Britain, Accounts and Papers, 1884. 
 
 C. 3947> P- 40.) 
 
 In the above we have the distinct request 
 
 38 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 that the suzerainty should be abolished by 
 an article in the new Convention. This 
 request was not acceded to, for not only 
 does no article abolishing the suzerainty ap- 
 pear in the London Convention of 1884, 
 but the new Convention states distinctly in 
 its preamble that it is the articles of the old 
 Convention that are changed ; and, further, 
 the Convention of 1881 is not repealed in 
 terms as a whole, but merely the articles. 
 In order to make this perfectly clear, I give 
 the Preamble to the Convention of 1884, 
 omitting only such parts as are descriptive 
 of the delegates on either side : — 
 
 " Whereas the Government of the Trans- 
 vaal State . . . have represented that the 
 Convention signed at Pretoria on the third day 
 of August, 1 88 1, . . . contains certain pro- 
 visions 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 . . , has 
 been pleased to take the said representations 
 into consideration : Now, therefore. Her 
 
 39 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 Majesty has been pleased to direct, and it is 
 hereby declared, that the following articles 
 of a new Convention . . . shall, when rati- 
 fied by the Volksraad of the South African 
 Republic, be substituted for the articles em- 
 bodied in the Convention of the 3d of 
 August, 1 88 1; which latter, pending such 
 ratification, shall continue in full force and 
 effect." (Great Britain, Accounts and Pa- 
 pers, 1884. C. 3914, p. 3.) 
 
 It is to be noted that the word " articles " 
 is used as indicating what portion of the old 
 Convention was to be superseded ; and we 
 may arrive at a truer appreciation of the 
 exact position if, seeing that the references 
 in the Preamble are to " articles of a new 
 Convention " and not to " a Convention," 
 we read the last paragraph of the Preamble 
 thus : " which latter articles " (those con- 
 tained in the Convention of 1881), " pending 
 such ratification, shall continue in full force 
 and effect." 
 
 The Convention was accepted by the 
 Transvaal delegates, notwithstanding that 
 their request for the abolition of the suze- 
 rainty had been refused ; and it was signed 
 on Feb. 27, 1884. 
 
 The Transvaal delegates went home, and 
 40 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 told the Boers that the suzerainty was abol- 
 ished ; and we hear nothing of the matter 
 again for thirteen years, when it crops up in 
 an unexpected quarter. 
 
 Article 14 of the London Convention 
 provided that " all persons other than na- 
 tives, conforming themselves to the laws of 
 the South African Republic, will have full 
 liberty, with their families, to enter, travel, 
 or reside in any part of the South African 
 Republic." In 1896 the Volksraad passed 
 a law, generally referred to as the Aliens 
 Expulsion Law, by the terms of which the 
 President, acting with the consent of the 
 Executive Council, could expel any stranger 
 "dangerous to public peace and order" from 
 the territory of the Republic, or assign 
 such a person a definite place of residence 
 within the Republic. The stranger so dealt 
 with was to have no recourse to the courts 
 of justice against such order. Concerning 
 this law the High Commissioner wrote to 
 the President and Executive Council of the 
 South African Republic : " Her Majesty's 
 Government, in view of Article 14 of the 
 London Convention of 1884, cannot admit 
 the right of the South African Republic to 
 expel or restrict foreigners who are not 
 
 41 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 shown to have failed to conform to the laws 
 of the Republic." . . . (Great Britain, Ac- 
 counts and Papers, 1899. C. 9345, p. 61.) 
 
 A long argument followed, in which the 
 South African Republic upheld their right in 
 the matter on the general grounds of interna- 
 tional law, ignoring the fact that the British 
 claim in the case rested not on general prin- 
 ciples, but on a specific contract embodied in 
 the Convention of 1884. To these argu- 
 ments Mr. Chamberlain replied : — 
 
 " The arguments adduced in the Note of 
 the Acting State Secretary, based on the gen- 
 eral principles of international law as applied 
 to ordinary treaties between independent 
 Powers, and on the actual or proposed legis- 
 lation of other nations (including the United 
 Kingdom), do not, in the view of Her Maj- 
 esty's Government, apply to the case under 
 consideration, which is not that of a treaty 
 between two States on an equal footing, but 
 a declaration by the Queen of Great Britain 
 and Ireland of the conditions upon which 
 she accorded complete self-government to 
 the South African Republic subject to her 
 suzerainty, these conditions having been ac- 
 cepted by the delegates of the South African 
 Republic and subsequently ratified by the 
 42 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 Volksraad." (Great Britain, Accounts and 
 Papers, 1898. C. 8721, p. 19.) 
 
 Out of the above statement arose a long 
 controversy as to the existence of the suze- 
 rainty, the South African Republic asserting 
 that the suzerainty was abolished entirely by 
 the Convention of 1884, and the British 
 Government maintaining that the suzerainty 
 still existed. As this question of suzerainty 
 was the rock on which the negotiations of 
 1899 went to pieces, I give here the exact 
 claims set forth by each Government, to- 
 gether with the arguments advanced in 
 support of either view. The claims and 
 arguments of the South African Republic are 
 printed in ordinary type : those of Great Brit- 
 ain are printed in italics. JThe ^s tatements 
 a re t^lce n frnm th ( B i iliih Pi i rl inmrnfnry Pa- 
 pers, C. 9507 o f 1899, "Correspondence 
 relating to the Statiis' of the South African 
 Republic." In this document the despatches 
 dealing with the question are reproduced 
 verbatim from the originals : — 
 
 Claim of South African Republic. — 
 Inasmuch as the Convention of 1881 was 
 entirely abrogated and superseded by that of 
 1884, in which alone certain limited and 
 
 43 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 specified rights were guaranteed to Great 
 Britain without there being further mention 
 of any self-government of this Republic, it 
 follows of itself that the now existing right 
 of absolute self-government of this Republic 
 is not derived from either the Convention of 
 1 88 1 or that of 1884, but simply and solely 
 follows from the inherent right of this Re- 
 public as a sovereign international State. 
 
 Claim of Great Britain. — The contention 
 that the South African Republic is a sovereign 
 international State is not warranted either by 
 law or history^ and is wholly inadmissible. 
 Her Majesty'' s Government are tmable to admit 
 either that the suzerai?ity has ceased to exist or 
 that the preamble to the Co?ivention of 1881, in 
 which was laid down the basis of the future 
 mutual relations of Her Majesty a?id the inhab- 
 itants of the South African Republic^ was re- 
 pealed by the Convention of 1884. 
 
 The Arguments. 
 
 South African Republic. — One of the 
 objects of the Transvaal in seeking a revision 
 of the Convention of 1881 was the removal 
 of the suzerainty ; and this object was of 
 great, if not supreme importance. 
 
 Great Britain. — As a matter of fact ^ the 
 
 44 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 Transvaal wrote to Lord Derby that what they 
 objected to about the suzerainty was the *' extent 
 of the suzerain rights reserved to Her Majesty 
 by articles 2 a7id 1^0/ the Convention,^^ Fur- 
 ther, the Transvaal Governmefit stated in their 
 request for the revision of the Convention of 
 1 88 1 that ^^ revision was urgent, especially re- 
 gar difig western border affair s.^^ 
 
 South African Republic. — In the Con- 
 vention of Pretoria the term "suzerainty'* 
 appears. In the Convention of London the 
 term has disappeared. This disappearance 
 cannot be accidental. The omission was 
 deliberate : one of the parties had objected 
 to it as an obnoxious stipulation, and it was 
 excluded in the new Convention. If the 
 British Government had wished to retain the 
 suzerainty in the Convention of 1884, it 
 would have been necessary for the British 
 Government to have come to a clear and 
 distinct understanding on that subject. 
 
 Great Britain. — // is admitted that the 
 word ^^ suzerainty ^^ does ?wt occur in the Con- 
 vention of 1884; but that fact does not imply 
 that the suzerainty was abolished, for (a) The 
 suzerainty rests priynarily on the preamble to 
 the Convention of 1881, which was never re- 
 pealed, as were the articles of that Convention; 
 (b) If it is claimed that the omission of the 
 
 45 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 word " suzerainty '' involves the destruction of 
 the suzerainty^ then, by parity of reasoning, the 
 omission of any grant of self government to the 
 South African Republic in the Convention of 
 1884 would involve the destruction of the rights 
 of the South African Republic to self govern- 
 ment. Relative to the latter part of the argu- 
 ment put forward by the South African Repub- 
 lic, namely, that if the suzerainty was to be 
 abolished Her Majesty s Government should 
 have come to a clear understanding on the sub- 
 ject, it is evident that if the status quo was to be 
 altered in the new Convention it lay with the 
 party desiring the change to arrive at a distinct 
 understanding to that effect — the presumption 
 of law would be that, in the absence of any 
 specific statement as to a new relation between 
 the parties, the status quo remained unaltered. 
 That this was the view held by the delegates 
 who represented the Transvaal in the negotia- 
 tio7is is placed beyo?id doubt by the fact that they 
 wrote to Lord Derby asking that an article 
 abolishing the suzerainty should be introduced 
 into the new Convention. This request was 
 refused, and no such article appears in the new 
 Convention, This fact clearly shows that whilst 
 Her Majesty's Government agreed with the 
 Transvaal delegates that if the suzerainty was 
 to be abolished it would have to be done by 
 means of an article in the Convention, they did 
 not agree with them that such an article should 
 
 46 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 be included in the Convention — a clear declara- 
 tion that the suzerainty was not to be abolished. 
 
 South African Republic. — The rights 
 of suzerainty under the Convention of 1881 
 can be classified as follows: i. The in- 
 competency of the South African Republic 
 to take direct action in negotiations with 
 foreign powers. 2. The control by the 
 British Resident of external and certain in- 
 ternal affairs. 3. The right of conducting 
 British troops through the territory of the 
 South African Republic. As these rights 
 have been reduced to the obligation of sub- 
 mitting all treaties made with foreign Powers 
 to Her Majesty for approval, the suzerainty 
 is clearly abolished. 
 
 Great Britain. — We admit your facts but 
 not your conclusion. You objected to the extent 
 of the suzerain rights under articles 2 and 18 
 of the Convention of 1881, and we have reduced 
 the extent of those rights. But we have retained 
 the most important right of all^ that of deciding 
 whether any treaty concluded by the South 
 African Republic with a foreign Power shall or 
 shall not come into force. 
 
 South African Republic. — In submit- 
 ting to the Transvaal delegates a draft of the 
 new Convention, Lord Derby enclosed a 
 copy of the Convention of 188 1. At the 
 
 47 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 head of this is a note which says, " The words 
 and paragraphs bracketed or printed in italics 
 are proposed to be inserted, those within a 
 black line are proposed to be omitted." 
 Now the preamble of 1881 is within a black 
 line, and is thus omitted. No conclusion 
 can be clearer. Still further, on the last 
 page of the draft, the following words, 
 " subject to the suzerainty of Her Majesty, 
 her Heirs and Successors," have been 
 crossed out by Lord Derby. In this manner 
 Lord Derby showed most distinctly that he 
 meant to have the suzerainty abolished. 
 
 Great Britain. — We admit that the words 
 and paragraphs referred to are omitted from the 
 Convention of 188 1 ; but the reason is obvious. 
 As merely the articles of the Convention of 
 1 88 1 were repealed there was no necessity 
 that the Preamble of 188 1, which laid down 
 the mutual relations of Her Majesty^ s Govern- 
 ment and the South African Republic^ should 
 be included in the new Convention^ which was 
 merely one substitutifig certaiti articles for certain 
 other articles. In stating that the words " sub- 
 ject to the suzerainty of Her Majesty etc.^^ were 
 crossed out by Lord Derby ^ the South African 
 Republic have failed to add that the words 
 " under which self-government has been granted 
 to the inhabitants of the Transvaal Territory " 
 
 48 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 are also crossed out. Any consequences which 
 are claimed fro?n the crossing out of the former 
 expression must fiecessarily follow the crossing 
 out of the latter. If the crossing out of " su- 
 zerainty " abolishes the suzerainty^ the crossing 
 out of ''*' self governments^ abolishes the self- 
 government. We do not admit the argument in 
 either case^ as we hold that the grant of self-gov- 
 ernment and the reservation of suzerainty alike 
 have their sole constitutional origin in the pre* 
 amble to the Convention ^ 1 88 1 . As the South 
 African Republic states that Lord Derby showed 
 distinctly that he 7neant to have the suzerainty 
 abolished we must refer it to the statement made 
 by Lord Derby in the House of Lords in March^ 
 1884, less than one month after the signing of 
 the Convention, He said, " Then the noble Earl 
 [Earl Cadogati\ said that the object of the Con- 
 vention had been to abolish the suzeraifity of the 
 British Crown, The word ^suzerainty* is a 
 very vague word, and I do not think it is capa- 
 ble of any very precise defijiition. Whatever we 
 may understand by it, I think it is not very easy 
 to define. But I apprehend, whether you call it 
 a protectorate, or a suzerainty, or the recognition 
 of England as a paramount Power, the fact is 
 that a certain controlling power is retained when 
 the State which exercises this suzerainty has a 
 right to veto any 7iegotiations ifito which the 
 dependefit State may enter with foreigfi Powers, 
 Whatever suzerainty meant iii the Convention 
 
 49 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 of Pretoria^ the condition of things which it 
 implied still remains ; although the word is not 
 actually employed^ we have kept the substance. 
 We have abstained from using the word because 
 it was not capable of legal definition^ and because 
 it seemed to be a word which was likely to lead 
 to misconception and misunderstanding y Here 
 is distinct declaration by Lord Derby that the 
 word was left out because it was an unsatis- 
 factory word and not because, as the South 
 African Republic alleges, it was intended to 
 abolish the suzerainty. 
 
 South African Republic. — Lord Derby 
 further clearly indicated his opinion that the 
 suzerainty was abolished in a despatch dated 
 Feb. 15, 1884. He said, " By the omission 
 of those articles of the Convention of Pre- 
 toria 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 inter- 
 ference and to conduct its diplomatic inter- 
 course 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." 
 
 50 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 Great Britain. — Taking Lord Derby's 
 words exactly as you quote them, it is evident 
 that Her Majesty has the power to prevent the 
 South African Republic from concluding any 
 treaty with a foreign Power, if such a course 
 should in any instance seem advisable. This 
 control exercised by the Queen could not exist in 
 regard to a sovereign international State, and, 
 in so far as this control does exist, it must be 
 evident that the South African Republic is not, 
 as it claims to be, a sovereign international State. 
 It is in this p07ve r ofjontrol that the British 
 
 suzerainty consis ts, [t is not rlninipd fhnf fZr^nt 
 T^ritain has any c nfifrg[ (^jxr the jn^"^'""^ nffni^.c 
 of the Republic in virtue of the su^ei-aiiit v. 
 
 South African Republic. — The Earl 
 of Kimberley, in an official despatch to the 
 South African Republic, said, "The term 
 suzerainty has been chcfSen as most con- 
 veniently describing superiority over a State 
 possessing independent rights of government 
 subject to reservations with reference to cer- 
 tain specified matters." Consequently, it 
 follows that, if suzerainty had continued to 
 exist under the Convention of 1884, the 
 only rights which could have been claimed 
 by the British Government would have been 
 such as were " expressly reserved to the 
 suzerain Power with reference to certain 
 
 5^ 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 specified matters." Her Britannic Majesty's 
 Government would not have been justified, 
 as a result of the vagueness and indefinite 
 nature of the word " suzerainty," in claim- 
 ing for themselves certain vague and indefi- 
 nite rights. 
 
 Great Britain. — We agree with you en- 
 tirely in accepting Lord Kimberky s defifiition 
 of suzerainty. His words appear to Her Maj- 
 esty s Government to accurately describe the ex- 
 isting relations betwee?i Her Majesty and the 
 South African Republic, We claim no v a^ue 
 and indefinite rights under the suzerc dutv^ we 
 assert merely that as tier Majesty retains in the 
 Convention of 1884 certain rights ^^ expressly 
 reserved to Iter with reference to certain speci- 
 fied matters ^^ it is clear that the ''^ superiority 
 over a State possessing independent rights of 
 government subject to reservations " is vested in 
 Her Majesty, and that therefore the claim of 
 the South African Republic to be a sovereign 
 international State is unjustifiable. 
 
 The above do not, of course, represent all 
 the arguments advanced by the South Afri- 
 can Republic ; but they are the principal 
 ones, and present the case of the Republic 
 in the strongest manner possible. With the 
 arguments before him the reader must judge 
 for himself whether the British suzerainty 
 
 52 
 
THE SUZERAINTY 
 
 over the South African Republic exists or 
 whether, as the Republic maintains, the 
 suzerainty has been entirely abolished, leav- 
 ing the Republic a sovereign international 
 State. 
 
 53 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 From the signing of the London Conven- 
 tion in 1884 there has gradually accumu- 
 lated that mass of grievances of British 
 subjects in the South African Republic 
 which finally, in 1899, came under the offi- 
 cial notice of the British Government. The 
 grievances may be divided into six classes : 
 (i) Economic Grievances ; (2) Grievances in 
 connection with the Legislative Acts and 
 the Judicial Procedure of the Republic ; (3) 
 Grievances in regard to Municipal Privileges 
 and Education ; (4) Ill-treatment of Colored 
 British Subjects; (5) Outrages on Persons 
 and Property ; (6) Political Grievances. 
 
 The economic grievances may be best set 
 forth in the terms employed by the Govern- 
 ment Industrial Commission of the South 
 African Republic. This Commission was 
 appointed by the Volksraad in 1897 ^^ ^"" 
 quire into the general economic condition of 
 the country. It consisted of six members, 
 all of whom were Dutch burghers; and 
 it may be safely assumed that, consider- 
 ing its composition, the Commission would 
 have no tendency to overstate the grievances 
 of the Uitlanders. The Report of the Com- 
 
 54 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 mission was presented to the Volksraad on 
 Aug. 6, 1897. ^ verbatim translation may- 
 be found in the British Parliamentary Papers 
 for 1899, C. 9345, pp. 2-13. 
 
 The Report states that after minute and 
 careful investigation the Commission ascer- 
 tained that during 1896 there were 183 gold 
 mines within the State ; that of these 79 
 produced gold ; that only 25 companies de- 
 clared dividends ; and that the cause of so 
 many mines not paying dividends was pri- 
 marily the high cost of production. The 
 Report continues : " . . . under existing 
 conditions, 100 mines will have to close 
 down. In that case an annual amount of 
 ;£"! 2,000,000 will be taken out of circula- 
 tion, with a result too disastrous to contem- 
 plate. To avoid such a calamity, your 
 Commission are of opinion that it is the 
 duty of the Government to co-operate with 
 the mining industry, and to devise means 
 with a view to make it possible for lower 
 grade mines to work at a profit, and gener- 
 ally to lighten the burdens of the mining in- 
 dustry, . . . the more so when the fact is 
 taken into consideration that up till now the 
 mining industry must be held as the financial 
 basis, support, and mainstay of the State. 
 
 55 
 
-THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 " Judging from recent events, and by the 
 persistent manner in which the mines have 
 reduced, and are further trying to reduce, the 
 expenses, it leaves no doubt with your Com- 
 mission that the mines, after so far having 
 taken the initiative, will act responsively to 
 any economical measure the Government 
 may think proper to introduce. Your Com- 
 mission entirely disapprove of the concessions 
 through which the industrial prosperity of 
 the country is hampered. Such might have 
 been expedient in the past, but the country 
 has arrived at a stage of development that 
 will only admit of free competition accord- 
 ing to Republican principles. This applies 
 more especially to the gold industry, that has 
 to face its own economical problems, with- 
 out being further burdened with concessions 
 that are irksome and injurious to the indus- 
 try, and will always remain a source of irri- 
 tation and dissatisfaction." 
 
 In regard to import duties the Commis- 
 sion say : " We can only recommend that, 
 if possible, food-stufFs ought to be entirely 
 free from taxation, as at the present moment 
 it is impossible to supply the population of 
 the Republic from the products of local agri- 
 culture ; and, consequently, importation is 
 
 56 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 absolutely necessary. . . . We wish to state 
 that the import duty of I2s, 6d. per cask on 
 cement seems excessively high. The high 
 freight on an article so heavy as cement al- 
 ready raises the price here to such an amount 
 that it ought to be very easy for any local 
 industr)^ to be able to compete. Your Com- 
 mission consequently recommend that the 
 special duty on cement be removed as speed- 
 ily as possible." 
 
 A very serious grievance of the gold indus- 
 try is that, owing to the lax administration 
 of the liquor law, the native labourers in the 
 mines are kept constantly supplied with in- 
 toxicants, with the effect that about one-third 
 of the labourers are always incapacitated from 
 work, owing to intoxication. Referring to 
 this, the Commission say, " It has been 
 proved to your Commission that the Liquor 
 Law is not carried out properly, and that the 
 mining industry has real grievances in con- 
 nection therewith, owing to the illicit sale of 
 strong drink to the natives at the mines." 
 
 In regard to gold thefts, which constitute 
 a very heavy drain on the industry, the Re- 
 port states : " According to the evidence 
 submitted to your Commission, gold thefts 
 are on the increase, . . . and amount to 
 
 57 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 about lo per cent, of the output, equivalent 
 to an amount of ;^750,ooo per annum. It 
 follows that the administration of the law 
 must be faulty, because there are very few 
 instances where the crime has been detected 
 and punished." 
 
 The Commission deals with two special 
 monopolies, — the brick monopoly and the 
 dynamite monopoly. As to the former the 
 Report says : " It has been clearly proved to 
 your Commission that the existing conces- 
 sion for the making of bricks by machinery 
 is a great disadvantage. The price of bricks 
 is thereby unduly increased. Your Commis- 
 sion consequently recommend that steps be 
 taken as speedily as possible to relieve the 
 population of the Republic of this undesirable 
 monopoly." The dynamite monopoly is dealt 
 with at some length, and I therefore extract 
 only the following sentences from the Report : 
 " Before entering on this subject, we wish to 
 put on record our disappointment with the 
 evidence tendered on behalf of the South 
 African Explosives Company [the company 
 holding the monopoly]. We had expected, 
 and we think not unreasonably, that they 
 would be able to give reliable information 
 for our guidance respecting the cost of im- 
 
 58 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 portation, as well as of local manufacture of 
 the principal explosives used for mining pur- 
 poses ; but, though persistently questioned on 
 these points, few facts were elicited, and, we 
 regret to say, they entirely failed to satisfy us 
 in this important respect. 
 
 "The importation of a cheap supply of 
 all necessaries required for mining purposes, 
 in order to secure success, is perhaps too ob- 
 vious to need repeating; but we may men- 
 tion that the one item most frequently 
 referred to by witnesses in this connection 
 was the cost of the explosives. It has, we 
 consider, been clearly proved that the price 
 paid by the mines for explosives of all kinds 
 is unreasonably high, having due regard to 
 original cost and expenses of delivery in 
 the South African Republic, and, in our 
 opinion, a considerable reduction should be 
 brought about. In making recommenda- 
 tions with this object in view, it must 
 be stated at the outset that the main diffi- 
 culty in dealing with the question arises 
 from the existence of the contract by means 
 of which the monopolists are able to main- 
 tain the present high price in spite of the 
 fact that the manufactured article is mostly 
 obtained by them in Europe at a very much 
 
 59 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 lower cost. Consequently, the advantages 
 which the Government intended to confer on 
 the country by establishing a new industry 
 here have not been realised, whilst the mo- 
 nopoly has proved a serious burden on the 
 mining industry. 
 
 " The mining industry has thuS to bear a 
 burden which does not enrich the State or 
 bring any benefit in return ; and this fact 
 must always prove a source of irritation and 
 annoyance to those who, while willing to 
 contribute to just taxation for the general 
 good, cannot acquiesce in an impost of the 
 nature complained of." 
 
 It was hoped by the mining community 
 that the Volksraad would take some favour- 
 able action on the Report of its own Com- 
 mission ; but the Sub-Commission of the 
 Volksraad, which was appointed to consider 
 the Report, made recommendations to the 
 Volksraad which had the practical effect of 
 discounting the greater part of the work of 
 the Industrial Commission. The concessions 
 complained of in the Report were upheld, 
 the reduction of import duty on cement 
 and the cancellation of the brick-making con- 
 cession were refused, the cancellation of the 
 dynamite monopoly was refused, and, whilst 
 60 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UI 
 
 the customs duties were taken off certain 
 food-stuft's, the duties on other food-stufFs 
 were largely increased. 
 
 I pass now to the grievances connected 
 with legislation and the administration of 
 justice. A number of laws in the South 
 African Republic contain provisions which 
 inflict great injustice on the Uitlander pop- 
 ulation, but I select three as typical. They 
 are the Judges Law of 1897, ^^^ P^^^ Law 
 of 1895, and the Aliens Expulsion Law of 
 1896. The Judges Law was passed with a 
 view to making the Courts of Justice sub- 
 servient to the executive authority. The 
 necessity of this law, from the standpoint 
 of the Transvaal Government, lay in the fact 
 that, when the Government, in its anxiety to 
 escape responsibilities laid on it by judg- 
 ments of the Courts, passed hasty resolutions 
 having retroactive scope, the Courts refused 
 to recognise the resolutions, on the ground 
 that they were in conflict with the Constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 In order to give an idea of the effect of 
 these Volksraad resolutions, I quote the fol- 
 lowing instance from Oom Paul's People^ 
 the author of which, Mr. Howard C. Hille- 
 gas, is a strong Boer sympathiser : " A 
 61 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 man named Dums, whose big farm on the 
 border became British territory through a 
 treaty, sued the Transvaal Government for 
 damages. Whereupon the Raad passed a law 
 that Dums could never sue the Government 
 for anything. Another man sued the Gov- 
 ernment for damages for injuries resulting 
 from a fall in the street. He was successful 
 in his suit ; but the Raad immediately there- 
 after passed a law making it impossible for 
 any person to sue the Government for inju- 
 ries received on public property." 
 
 The most flagrant case of this kind was 
 the action of the Government in regard to 
 the proclamation of the farm Witfontein as 
 a gold-field. The Government issued a 
 proclamation to the effect that on a certain 
 day and at a certain hour Witfontein would 
 be thrown open for pegging claims. There 
 was a rush to the place; and the Govern- 
 ment, instead of sending a force of police to 
 preserve order, issued an illegal notice with- 
 drawing the proclamation, and declaring that 
 the claims would be given out by lottery. 
 Many prospectors had already laid out their 
 claims, and these men informed the Govern- 
 ment that they intended to sue for their 
 rights in the Courts. Immediately the Raad 
 62 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 passed a law to the effect that any claim for 
 damages would be illegal, and that the Gov- 
 ernment was absolved from all responsibility 
 in regard to their action in the circum- 
 stances. It was in connection with this 
 episode that the High Court crisis of 1897 
 arose. One of the men who had pegged 
 claims was an American named Brown. 
 He sued the Government for his rights 
 under the proclamation. But, whilst the 
 case was pending, the Volksraad passed the 
 law stating that no claims could lie against 
 the Government in this matter. The Chief 
 Justice of the Transvaal decided that this 
 law was in conflict with the Constitution, 
 and gave judgment in favour of Brown. 
 President Kruger immediately introduced a 
 new law empowering him to demand from 
 all the judges an assurance that they would 
 not ever again question the constitutionality 
 of any resolution passed by the Volksraad, 
 and giving the President the authority to 
 dismiss from the bench any judge who 
 declined to give such assurances. The 
 judges thereupon closed the Courts, declar- 
 ing that it was impossible to administer jus- 
 tice under such coercion. One of the 
 judges, Mr. Gregorowski, stated that no 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 honourable man could possibly sit on the 
 bench of the High Court as long as Law i 
 of 1897 w^s ^" force. President Kruger 
 then agreed to a compromise: if the judges 
 would refrain for a while from exercising 
 their right of declaring a law unconstitu- 
 tional, the President would introduce, as 
 speedily as possible, a law guaranteeing the 
 independence of the Courts. This was ac- 
 cepted by the judges. But, as time passed 
 and no such law was introduced by the 
 President, the Chief Justice wrote and with- 
 drew his pledge. President Kruger imme- 
 diately dismissed the Chief Justice and one 
 of the other judges, and appointed Mr. Greg- 
 orowski as Chief Justice. The law under 
 which Mr. Gregorowski had stated it to be 
 impossible for an honourable man to sit on 
 the bench was still in force when that 
 gentleman accepted the Chief-Justiceship. 
 
 In connection with the High Court crisis 
 it must be noted that the President has fre- 
 quently treated the decisions of the Court 
 with contempt. Two instances are given 
 by Mr. Fitzpatrick in his The Transvaal 
 from Within. An educated East Indian, 
 named Rachman, a British subject, in fol- 
 lowing a strayed horse, trespassed on the 
 
 64 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 farm of one of the members of the Volks- 
 raad. He was arrested and charged with in- 
 tent to steal, tried by the brother of the 
 owner of the farm, and sentenced to receive 
 twenty-five lashes and to pay a fine, the 
 same sentence being inflicted on his Hotten- 
 tot servant, who was with him. Rachman 
 protested, and entered an appeal, in which 
 he stated the Fieldcornet had exceeded his 
 powers in giving lashes, and offering security 
 of £4.0 pending the hearing of the appeal. 
 His protests were disregarded, and he was 
 flogged. He appealed to the Circuit Court, 
 and obtained a judgment with heavy damages 
 against the Fieldcornet. President Kruger 
 shortly afterwards refunded the amount of 
 the damages to the Fieldcornet, on the 
 ground that, as he had acted in his oflicial 
 capacity, he should be protected. Another 
 case was that of a native, named April, who 
 worked with a Boer farmer for some years 
 on the promise that he should receive as 
 payment a certain number of cattle. When 
 the term of service was out, April applied 
 for his cattle and a permit to leave the farm. 
 The farmer, however, refused to let him go, 
 and forcibly retained him and his family. 
 April appealed to the nearest Fieldcornet, a 
 
 65 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 man named Prinsloo, who acted in such an 
 outrageous manner that, when the case sub- 
 sequently came up for trial before the Chief 
 Justice that official said that Prinsloo's con- 
 duct had been brutal in the extreme and a 
 flagrant breach of power, perpetrated with 
 the object of establishing slavery. April ob- 
 tained judgment with all costs against Prins- 
 loo. " Within a few days of this decision 
 being arrived at," says Mr. Fitzpatrick, " the 
 President, addressing a meeting of burghers, 
 publicly announced that the Government had 
 reimbursed Prinsloo, adding, ' Notwithstand- 
 ing the judgment of the High Court, we 
 consider Prinsloo to have been right.' " 
 
 An excellent example of the difficulties 
 under which the gold industry has to labour 
 is the Pass Law. This law was drawn up 
 by General Joubert, with the assistance and 
 advice of the Chamber of Mines, in 1894. 
 It may be mentioned that one of the chief 
 objects of the law was to facilitate the 
 handling of the large numbers of natives 
 who come to work in the mines. By means 
 of the pass issued to each labourer it was 
 possible to keep track of the men, and thus 
 to reduce the number of undetected crimes 
 committed at the mines. After the law had 
 66 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 been drafted, it was allowed to stand over for 
 nearly two years ; and, when at length it 
 was passed by the Raad, the Government 
 neglected to create the department for the 
 carrying out of the law. But, although no 
 department was created, and although the 
 law was thus inoperative, a chief of the im- 
 aginary department was appointed, at a 
 handsome salary. The man who was ap- 
 pointed to the post was a brother of one of 
 the members of the Executive Council, and 
 he had been dismissed from an office two 
 years previously for failure to clear himself 
 of serious charges which had been brought 
 against him. 
 
 The Aliens Expulsion Law I have re- 
 ferred to in an earlier chapter, in connection 
 with the question of suzerainty. As this 
 law provided that any person, not a burgher, 
 could be expelled from the country or forced 
 to live in a specified location, on the mere 
 authority of the President and the Executive 
 Council, without any charge being made that 
 the person so expelled had broken any law 
 of the Republic, and as such person was to 
 have no right of appeal to the Courts against 
 such an arbitrary decision, the law was 
 clearly a breach of the London Convention, 
 
 67 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 the Fourteenth Article of which says, " All 
 persons, other than natives, conforming 
 themselves to the laws of the Republic, 
 will have full liberty, with their families, to 
 enter, travel, or reside in any part of the 
 South African Republic." It will be seen 
 at once that the only condition under which 
 this full right of residence was conferred 
 was that the person claiming the right must 
 conform to the laws of the Republic. 
 
 The municipal grievances of the Uit- 
 landers centre around the failure of President 
 Kruger to keep his promise of conferring mu- 
 nicipal government on Johannesburg. Con- 
 cerning this the great petition signed by 
 21,684 British subjects, which was pre- 
 sented to Her Majesty in March, 1899, 
 says : " The promises made by the President 
 with regard to conferring municipal govern- 
 ment on Johannesburg were, to outward ap- 
 pearance, kept ; but it is an ineffective 
 measure, conferring small benefit upon the 
 community and investing the inhabitants 
 with but little additional power of legislating 
 for their own municipal affairs. Of the two 
 members to be elected for each ward, one, 
 at least, must be a burgher. Besides this, 
 the burgomaster is appointed by the Govern- 
 68 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 ment, not elected by the people. The burg- 
 omaster has a casting vote, and, considering 
 himself a representative of the Government, 
 and not of the people, has not hesitated to 
 oppose his will to the unanimous vote of the 
 Councillors. The Government also possesses 
 the right to veto any resolution of the Coun- 
 cil. As the burghers resident in Johannes- 
 burg were estimated at the last census at 
 1,039 in number as against 23,503 Uitland- 
 ers, and as they belong to the poorest and 
 most ignorant class, it is manifest that these 
 burghers have an undue share in the repre- 
 sentation of the town, and are invested with 
 a power which neutralises the efforts of the 
 larger and more intelligent portion of the 
 community. Every burgher resident is qual- 
 ified to vote, irrespective of being a rate- 
 payer or property owner within the municipal 
 area." 
 
 The educational grievances of the Uit- 
 landers may be briefly summed up thus : 
 Faking the year 1895 as an example, we 
 find that the amount spent on education by 
 the South African Republic was ;£"63,ooo. 
 Of this sum at least ;^50,ooo was contrib- 
 uted by the Uitlanders. Of the total sum 
 ^62,350 was spent on the education of 
 
 69 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 7,508 Boer children and ;^650 on 7,090 
 Uitlander children. In other words and in 
 round figures, $^0 was spent on each Boer 
 child and only 45 cents on each Uitlander 
 child. 
 
 Notwithstanding the fact that a large num- 
 ber of the Boers themselves are anxious to 
 have their children instructed in English, the 
 Government insists that Dutch be taught for 
 one hour a day in the first year, two hours a 
 day during the second year, three hours a 
 day during the third year, and that in the 
 fourth year Dutch shall become the sole 
 medium of instruction. In order to avoid 
 irritating and prolonged discussion with the 
 Government in regard to education, the peo- 
 ple of Johannesburg offered to raise a fund 
 of ;^2,ooo,ooo for the purpose of establish- 
 ing schools for the Uitlander population. 
 The Government, however, looked with dis- 
 favour on the scheme, and placed many ob- 
 stacles in the way, with the result that, 
 although something has been done, every 
 step has to be carried out in the face of the 
 hostility of the authorities. 
 
 The complaints filed by British subjects at 
 the office of Her Majesty's agent at Pretoria, 
 describing outrages on their persons and prop- 
 70 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 erty, are too numerous to permit of extended 
 examination. I select one or two as being 
 typical of the rest. The facts are such as 
 are set forth in the affidavits accompanying 
 each complaint. 
 
 A widow named Caroline Lingveldt com- 
 plained that on the night of Oct. 29, 1899, 
 Fieldcornet Lombaard and a number of other 
 men knocked at the door of her house, and 
 threatened to kick it open if she did not at 
 once admit them. The men were in search 
 of the woman's son, who, it was alleged, had 
 no pass. What occurred after the house had 
 been entered I give in the words of the de- 
 ponent : " Another man, long and stout, 
 whose name I do not know, came then into 
 the house, and pulled the blanket ofF the bed 
 on which my daughter Caroline, aged sixteen, 
 was lying, and did the same to the bed in 
 which were Mabel Blommenstein and my 
 little nephew. The night was cool. After 
 having looked under the bed and behind a 
 screen, the man went out. My boy was 
 taken to prison because he had no pass. 
 Since then I have bailed him out for £2^ 
 which was returned to me on his acquittal. 
 Mabel Blommenstein was nine years old, and 
 I boarded and lodged her. This little girl 
 
 71 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 Mabel became suddenly ill later in the night, 
 having been frightened at the noise and ex- 
 citement. . . . She had to go to the hospi- 
 tal, and has since died there. I annex a 
 certificate of Dr. Croghan as to the cause 
 of her death." The certificate states : " On 
 Sunday morning, October 30 last, I was 
 called to attend Mabel van Blommenstein. 
 She was suffering from an attack of acute 
 pneumonia, and was in a very excited and 
 nervous condition. This condition is not 
 usually associated with pneumonia, but was, 
 in my opinion, produced by fright and shock. 
 She died in the Johannesburg Hospital on 
 Tuesday, the 15th November; and I have 
 no hesitation in stating that her illness was 
 aggravated by exposure to night air and ex- 
 citement, previous to my attendance. Edw. 
 H. Croghan, M.D." 
 
 Another typical case is that of James 
 Harris, a cab-driver, a British subject born 
 in Cape Town. He stated on oath : " On 
 Monday last I went to the Pass Office to 
 get a pass. The official in charge told me 
 that the place was too full, and that I must 
 come the next day. Accordingly, yesterday 
 afternoon about three o'clock I went again. 
 The official asked me for my pass, to which 
 
 72 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 I replied that I had not one. I told him 
 that I had only been here a fortnight, and 
 showed him my cab license. Thereupon I 
 was arrested and taken to the Charge Office 
 for about an hour, and then I was taken 
 round to the Bree Street Charge Office. 
 Then I was released on bail, which I found 
 myself. This morning I appeared before 
 the third Landdrost, and was fined £1 or 
 fourteen days. The fine I paid. I was not 
 asked whether I pleaded guilty or not guilty, 
 nor were the merits of my case gone into in 
 any way." 
 
 The two facts which stand out most prom- 
 inently in the above cases, and in the large 
 number of similar cases, are that the police 
 of Johannesburg make a habit of forcibly 
 entering the houses of peaceable British resi- 
 dents, without warrant, and that British sub- 
 jects are continually punished by the Boer 
 magistrates without any form of trial being 
 gone through and without an opportunity of 
 defence being afforded them. 
 
 But the most serious instances of outrages 
 on British subjects were the murders of Mrs. 
 Appelbe and of Tom Jackson Edgar. Lit- 
 tle need be added in regard to the former to 
 the statement made by the secretary of the 
 
 73 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 Wesleyan Missionary Society in the following 
 letter : — 
 
 Wesleyan Mission House, 
 BisHOPGATE Street Within, London, 
 May 8, 1899. 
 
 To THE Secretary of State for the 
 Colonies : 
 *S*/r, — On behalf of the Wesleyan Mis- 
 sionary Society I beg to bring under your 
 notice the following most distressing occur- 
 rence. On Friday, April 28, Mrs. Appelbe, 
 the wife of the Rev. R. F. Appelbe, Wes- 
 leyan missionary, residing at Fordsburg, Jo- 
 hannesburg, in the South African Republic, 
 was going to church, when she was set upon 
 by some miscreants, European or native is 
 not yet clearly known, but probably native, 
 and so brutally treated that she died from her 
 injuries on the Tuesday following. Mrs. 
 Appelbe was the daughter of John Holder, 
 Esq., J. P., of Folkestone; and her terrible 
 death has not only caused sorrow and misery 
 to her husband and friends, but has also 
 caused alarm and indignation throughout our 
 church in the Transvaal and in this country. 
 A correspondent, recently returned from Jo- 
 hannesburg, and who has lived there for 
 some time, declares that the Boer policemen 
 
 74 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 and officials are useless for the purposes of 
 detection and punishment of crime. Under 
 these circumstances, and for the protection 
 of our missionaries and their families, I have 
 the honour to request, respectfully and ear- 
 nestly, that instructions may be given to the 
 representative of Great Britain in the South 
 African Republic to make rigorous and 
 searching inquiry into this terrible and most 
 painful case. I have, etc., 
 
 William Perkins, 
 Secretary Wesley an Missionary Society. 
 
 The murder of Mrs. Appelbe in daylight, 
 and on a public highway, shows the insecu- 
 rity of life in Johannesburg, notwithstanding 
 the enormous revenue collected from the 
 Johannesburg people. And the fact that no 
 arrests have been made in connection with 
 the murder casts some light on the efficiency 
 of the Boer police. 
 
 The facts in the Edgar case are, however, 
 still more deplorable. According to the evi- 
 dence submitted at the trial of the murderer, 
 Edgar was walking home one evening, and, 
 when nearing his house, he met two men, 
 with one of whom he had a quarrel. He 
 knocked the man down with his fist, and 
 
 75 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 then continued on his way home. The man 
 was not seriously injured. After Edgar had 
 been in his house for a few minutes, a 
 policeman, named Barend Stephanus Jones, 
 assisted by others, broke open the door of 
 Edgar's house ; and, as soon as Edgar came 
 forward, Jones drew a revolver, and shot him 
 dead, his body falling into the arms of his 
 wife, who was beside him. 
 
 Jones then ran away, but was subsequently 
 arrested on a charge of murder. He was 
 immediately released on giving bail for 
 ;£^200, the same amount as had been exacted 
 a few days previously from an Uitlander 
 charged with common assault. The charge 
 of murder was subsequently reduced to that 
 of culpable homicide. On this charge Jones 
 was acquitted, the judge who summed up 
 the case informing the jury that the only 
 point to be considered was whether the 
 police were acting in the execution of their 
 duty when they broke open the door of 
 Edgar's house. If the jury thought that they 
 were, he said, they would of course bring in 
 a verdict of not guilty. The case was 
 closed by the judge informing the accused 
 that he agreed with the verdict of the jury, 
 and that he hoped the police, under difficult 
 
 76 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 circumstances, would always know how to 
 do their duty. 
 
 The murder of Edgar caused great excite- 
 ment throughout the Republic, and led, in- 
 cidentally, to the outrage known as the 
 " Amphitheatre Case/' Shortly after the 
 murder occurred, a petition was got up, 
 setting forth the facts and appealing to Her 
 Majesty for protection. This petition was 
 signed by about five thousand British sub- 
 jects. It was decided that the signatories 
 of the petition should go in a mass to the 
 office of the British vice-consul at Johannes- 
 burg, and present the document to him. 
 The crowd collected in the streets ; and an 
 Englishman, named Webb, who was in a 
 carriage, called to the people to go to the vice- 
 consul's office. When they arrived there, 
 another Englishman, a Mr. Dodd, read the 
 petition aloud from the balcony of the vice- 
 consulate. The petition, for certain reasons, 
 into which it is not necessary to enter, was 
 not forwarded to Her Majesty. 
 
 Soon after the petition had been presented 
 to the vice-consul, Messrs. Webb and Dodd 
 were arrested for having organised an illegal 
 meeting, the Government holding that the 
 calling out of directions to go to the vice- 
 
 77 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 consul's and the reading of the petition con- 
 stituted breaches of the Public Meetings 
 Law. The men were released on bail of 
 ^i,ooo each, a sum five times as great as 
 that required from the murderer of Edgar. 
 
 This arbitrary act served to still further 
 inflame the Johannesburg people, and it was 
 decided to hold a public meeting of protest 
 in the Amphitheatre. The Public Meetings 
 Law permits the holding of meetings in 
 enclosed buildings, whilst forbidding open- 
 air gatherings. In order to avoid any mis- 
 understanding, one of the organisers of the 
 meeting went to the State Secretary and to 
 the State Attorney of the Republic, and, 
 after explaining clearly that the objects of the 
 proposed meeting were to protest against the 
 arrest of Messrs. Dodd and Webb, to con- 
 demn the Public Meetings Act, and to in- 
 dorse a petition to Her Majesty, he was 
 told that, although the objects of the meet- 
 ing were distasteful to the Government, there 
 was no legal objection to the meeting, and 
 that therefore it would not be prohibited. 
 
 The following description of the meeting 
 is taken from a letter addressed to Mr. 
 Conygham Greene, Her Britannic Majesty's 
 agent at Pretoria, by Mr. W. Wybergh, 
 
 78 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 President of the South African League. 
 Mr. Wybergh's account of the affair is sub- 
 stantiated by twenty-six sworn statements. 
 These affidavits may be found in extenso 
 in British Blue Book C. 9345 of 1899, 
 pp. 160-175. 
 
 " As a proof of the peaceful objects of the 
 meeting and of our intention to avoid any- 
 thing in the nature of rioting, I may here 
 mention that ladies were invited to attend, 
 and that a considerable number actually did 
 so. The British subjects who attended 
 were, also, entirely unarmed. Further, it 
 had originally been intended to hold the 
 meeting at 8 p.m. ; but, although this would 
 have insured a much larger attendance of 
 our supporters, we altered the hour to 
 4 P.M., with the express object of avoiding 
 the presence of any noisy or otherwise unde- 
 sirable element, and of being able to recog- 
 nise clearly any disturber of the meeting. 
 Of this proceeding, and of some of the rea- 
 sons for it, I informed the State Attorney at 
 our interview. I will now describe shortly 
 what occurred at the meeting. 
 
 *' The meeting took place in a large wood 
 and iron building known as the Amphi- 
 theatre, generally used for circuses and sim- 
 
 79 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 ilar public entertainments. Before the ad- 
 vertised time of the meeting the side doors 
 were forced by a large body of Boers, police 
 in plain clothes and Government officials, 
 numbering several hundreds. These people 
 were all armed, some with sticks, iron bars, 
 and police batons, and some with revolvers. 
 The main body took up a position immedi- 
 ately below the platform. Other smaller but 
 organised bodies of Boers distributed them- 
 selves throughout the building, and the re- 
 mainder of the space was filled with quiet 
 and orderly British subjects. As soon as the 
 Committee appeared on the platform and the 
 chairman began to address the meeting, 
 the Boers and police, under the leadership 
 of Mr. Broeksma, the third Public Prose- 
 cutor, and other well-known men, began to 
 make an uproar. It was clearly evident that 
 the mob was acting under the orders of rec- 
 ognised leaders, who gave them orders by 
 preconcerted signals. While the chairman 
 was speaking, a determined attempt was made 
 to storm the box reserved for the ladies ; but 
 this was fortunately frustrated. The brutal 
 and outrageous object of this attempt, as 
 well as its organised character, will fully 
 appear from the accompanying affidavits. 
 So 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 " On account of the uproar the chairman 
 was compelled to cut short his address ; and 
 at a signal given by the leaders of the Boers 
 a large body of police in plain clothes, armed 
 with their batons, started the riot by forcing 
 their way to and fro across the building, 
 using their batons freely upon any British 
 subjects they came across. Simultaneously 
 the large body of Boers in front of the plat- 
 form, under the leadership of Government 
 officials, and smaller bodies scattered through- 
 out the building, began to lay about them 
 with sticks and iron bars. As soon as this 
 began, several members of the Committee 
 and others sought the protection of the po- 
 lice in uniform, who were drawn up in order 
 outside the building ; but their request was re- 
 fused. Numbers of British subjects there- 
 upon sought the permission of the chairman 
 to defend themselves ; but the chairman, 
 remembering his promise to the Transvaal 
 Government, and observing, moreover, that 
 many of the police were armed with revol- 
 vers and only waited for an opportunity to 
 use them, refused permission, and called on 
 all British subjects to go quietly home. 
 
 '' As soon as, upon the request of the 
 chairman, the building became a little more 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 empty, and the audience had partly dispersed, 
 the Boers and police, again led and instigated 
 by Government officials, began to break all 
 the furniture and to use the fragments as 
 weapons. The broken furniture was piled 
 up in the middle of the building, and an 
 attempt was made to set the whole on fire. 
 Meanwhile numerous appeals had been made 
 to Commandant Van Dam, the chief of 
 police, and to other members of the police 
 force, to arrest men in the act of rioting; 
 but they refused. 
 
 " Although, fortunately, no lives were lost, 
 a great many serious and dangerous assaults 
 were committed by the police and officials 
 upon British subjects, for which it appears 
 hopeless for the aggrieved parties to demand 
 compensation. Throughout the riot the 
 police on duty fraternised with the mob, 
 and even before all the British subjects had 
 left the Amphitheatre this sympathy was 
 most openly expressed ; and the police shook 
 hands with the mob, and congratulated them. 
 Two lieutenants of police were carried 
 shoulder-high by the rioters without any ex- 
 pression of disapproval by the commandant. 
 And, when it was all over, Mr. Boshof, the 
 Registrar of the second Criminal Court, ad- 
 82 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 dressed the mob, and said, ' Men, you have 
 all done your duty splendidly : now you may 
 go home,' or words to that effect." 
 
 It only remains to add that the British 
 Government asked the Government of the 
 South African Republic to institute an in- 
 quiry into the proceedings at the Amphi- 
 theatre meeting, and that this request was 
 met by a flat refusal. 
 
 I pass now to the political grievances of 
 the Uitlanders. First, a word as to the polit- 
 ical condition of the Uitlander. In 1885 
 the revenue of the South African Republic 
 was ;^ 1 62,709. This was before there was 
 any considerable Uitlander population. In 
 1899 the revenue had risen to ;^4,o87,852. 
 'Of this sum more than ;^3, 250,000 came 
 out of the pockets of the Uitlanders. Yet 
 these men, who pay more than three-quarters 
 of the taxes, are not permitted to have any 
 voice in the disposition of this vast sum of 
 money. As a direct cause of this, the tax- 
 payers are compelled to put up with what- 
 ever kind of government ^he small body of 
 practically untaxed Boers care to give them. 
 The country is ruled to a considerable extent 
 by means of arbitrary resolutions of the Ex- 
 ecutive Council -y but, even when the ordinary 
 
 83 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 course of legislation is pursued, the legislative 
 body is one elected entirely by Boers, and the 
 majority of the tax-payers are absolutely un- 
 represented. 
 
 This great injustice may be looked at from 
 three different standpoints. First, although 
 nothing is said in the Convention of 1884 
 about enabling the British residents in the 
 Transvaal to renounce their British citizen- 
 ship and become burghers of the Republic 
 on reasonable conditions, the British Gov- 
 ernment had every reason to believe that 
 such facilities would be provided ; and, in 
 fact, the Convention was signed in that 
 belief. This is apparent from the nature of 
 the discussion which preceded the signing 
 of the Convention of 1881,5^ Part ^^ ^^^^ 
 discussion was as follows : — jpu^>ti^/«P^ V^ 
 
 " Sir H. Robinson. — Before annexation, 
 had British subjects complete freedom of 
 trade throughout the Transvaal ? Were they 
 on the same footing as citizens ? 
 
 " Mr. Kruger. — They were on the same 
 footing as burghers. There was not the 
 slightest difference in accordance with the 
 Sand River Convention. 
 
 "Sir H. Robinson. — I presume you will 
 not object to that continuing ? 
 
 84 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 "Mr. Kruger. — No, there will be equal 
 protection for everybody. 
 
 " Sir E. Wood. — And equal privileges ? 
 
 "Mr. Kruger. — We make no difference 
 as far as burgher rights are concerned. 
 There may, perhaps, be some slight differ- 
 ence in the case of a young person who has 
 just come into the country." 
 
 A few days later, at a subsequent meeting, 
 Dr. Jorrisen, one of the Transvaal delegates, 
 corrected Mr. Kruger's answer to Sir E. 
 Wood, Mr. Kruger being present at the 
 time. He said : " What Mr. Kruger in- 
 tended to convey was this : According to our 
 law a new-comer has not his burgher rights 
 immediately. The words ' young person ' 
 do not refer to age, but to the time of resi- 
 dence in the Republic. According to our 
 Constitution you have to reside a year in 
 the country." 
 
 But, as the British Government has never 
 demanded the franchise for the Uitlanders as 
 a right under the Convention, we may leave 
 this point, and pass to the second aspect of 
 the matter. 
 
 Now, apart from any specified agreements, 
 the right of the tax-payer to representation 
 is one which has been recognised by all civ- 
 
 85 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 ilised countries, with the exception of Russia. 
 This right is granted, not only in republics, 
 all of which, with the exception of the South 
 African Republic, are founded and maintain 
 their existence on this very principle, but 
 also in all the European monarchies. It 
 may be said that the demands of the Uit- 
 landers to have a share in the Government 
 of the country of which they form the finan- 
 cial backbone has the sanction of universal 
 consent. 
 
 But, lastly, even if we leave out of the 
 question all assertion of specific or general 
 right, we see that the Uitlander tax-payer 
 must have the franchise, because it is an 
 absolute physical impossibility, in point of 
 fact, to take a hundred thousand English- 
 speaking white men and place them perma- 
 nently in a position of political and economic 
 servitude to seventy-five thousand Boers. 
 
 It must not be overlooked that a con- 
 siderable body of the Boers realise this, and 
 that many of them are in favor of granting 
 the franchise, on reasonable terms, to the 
 Uitlanders. 
 
 In August, 1895, a petition signed by 
 35,483 Uitlanders was laid before the Volks- 
 raad, praying that political representation 
 86 
 
GRIEVANCES OF UITLANDERS 
 
 might be granted to the law-abiding Uit- 
 lander population. Whilst it is true that 
 one member of the Volksraad made a speech 
 when the matter came up, declaring that, if 
 the Uitlanders wanted any rights, they had 
 better come on and fight for them, other 
 members, notably Mr. Jeppe, strongly ad- 
 vised the government to accede to the peti- 
 tion. In the course of a brilliant speech 
 Mr. Jeppe said : " Who are the people who 
 now demand from us a reasonable extension 
 of the franchise ? There are, to begin with, 
 almost a thousand old burghers who consent 
 to such extension. There are, in addition, 
 890 petitioners, also old burghers, who com- 
 plain that the franchise has been narrowed by 
 recent legislation. There are 5,100, chiefly 
 from the Rand, who ask for extension sub- 
 ject to the ballot, the principle of which has 
 already been adopted by you ; and there is 
 lastly a monster petition bearing thirty-five 
 thousand names, chiefly from the Rand gold 
 fields. And, in passing, I may mention that 
 I have convinced myself that the signatures 
 to it, with very few exceptions, perhaps, are 
 undoubtedly genuine. 
 
 "Well, this petition has been, practically, 
 signed by the entire population of the Rand. 
 
 87 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 There are not three hundred persons of any 
 standing whose names do not appear there. 
 It contains the name of the millionaire capi- 
 talist on the same page as that of the carrier 
 or miner; that of the owner of half a district 
 next to that of a clerk ; and the signature of 
 the merchant who possesses stores in more 
 than one town of this Republic next to that 
 of the official. It embraces also all national- 
 ities. The German merchant, the doctor 
 from Cape Town, the English director, the 
 teacher from the Paarl, — they have all signed 
 it. So have — and that is significant — old 
 burghers from the Free State, whose fathers, 
 with yours, reclaimed this country. And it 
 bears, too, the signatures of some who have 
 been born in this country, who know no other 
 fatherland than this Republic, but whom the 
 law regards as strangers. Then, too, there 
 are the new-comers. They have settled for 
 good. They have built Johannesburg, one of 
 the wonders of the age, now valued at many 
 millions sterling, and which in a few short 
 vears will contain from a hundred to a hun- 
 dred and fifty thousand souls. They own 
 half the soil, they pay at least three-quarters 
 of the taxes. Nor are they persons who be- 
 long to a subservient race. They come from 
 88 
 
GRIEVANCES OF -UITLANDERS 
 
 countries where they freely exercised politi- 
 cal rights, which can never be long denied 
 to free-born men. They are, in short, men 
 who in capital, energy, and education, are at 
 least our equals. All these persons are gath- 
 ered together, thanks to our law, into one 
 camp. Through our own act, this multitude, 
 which contains elements which the most 
 suspicious amongst us would not hesitate to 
 trust, is compelled to stand together, and so 
 to stand in this most fatal of all questions 
 in antagonism to us. Is that fact alone not 
 sufficient to warn us, and to prove how un- 
 statesmanlike our policy is ? 
 
 " What will we do with them now ? 
 Shall we convert them into friends, or shall 
 we send them away empty, dissatisfied, im- 
 bittered ? What will our answer be ? Dare 
 we refer them to the present law, which, first, 
 expects them to wait for fourteen years, and 
 even then pledges itself to nothing, but leaves 
 everything to a Volksraad which cannot 
 decide until 1905 ? It is a law which denies 
 all political rights even to their children born 
 in this country. Can they gather any hope 
 from that ? 
 
 " Well, should we resolve now to refuse 
 this request, what will we do when, as we 
 
 89 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 well know must happen, it is repeated by 
 two hundred thousand one day. You will 
 all admit that the doors must be opened. 
 What will become of us or our children on 
 that day, when we shall find ourselves in a 
 minority of perhaps one in twenty, without 
 a single friend amongst the other nineteen, 
 amongst those who will then tell us they 
 wished to be brothers, but we by our own 
 act made them strangers to the Republic ? 
 Old as the world is, has any attempt like 
 ours ever succeeded for long ? Shall we 
 say, as a French king did, that things will 
 last our time, and after that we reck not 
 the deluge ? Again I ask. What account is 
 to be given to our descendants, and what 
 can be our hope in the future ? " 
 
 With this clear and convincing statement 
 from a man who is a Boer and a member of 
 the Volksraad, I leave the question of the 
 political grievances of the Uitlanders. 
 
 90 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 The Jameson Raid was one of the most 
 unfortunate events that has ever happened in 
 South Africa. Had the Uitlanders already 
 risen in revolt, the whole affair would have 
 taken on a different aspect ; for, if with the 
 aid of Jameson and his men the Uitlanders 
 had succeeded in overthrowing the Govern- 
 ment of the Republic, the revolt and the 
 incursion would have risen to the plane of a 
 revolution, and its success would have been 
 its justification. 
 
 As things turned out, however, the Raid 
 had all the appearance of an act of foreign 
 aggression ; and the world at large, in sympa- 
 thising with President Kruger, naturally 
 failed to remember that, outrageous as the act 
 appeared, it was the outcome of certain intol- 
 erable wrongs suffered by the Uitlanders, and 
 that the existence of these wrongs was not 
 in any way affected by the doing of another 
 wrong by a third party. Another unfortu- 
 nate effect of the Raid was to create a wide 
 impression during the time when the Uit- 
 lander grievances were under discussion in 
 1899 that the grievances were in a large 
 measure the result of the Raid ; whereas, 
 
 91 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 as a matter of fact, the grievances were its 
 cause. In a similar manner it is generally 
 thought that the excessive armaments of the 
 Boers proceeded from a just fear inspired 
 by the Raid, the truth being that the arm- 
 ing of the Boer population by the Govern- 
 ment at the expense of the Uitlanders v^as 
 one of the contributing causes to the Jo- 
 hannesburg rising. 
 
 But the vi^orst feature of the Raid, as far 
 as public opinion in Europe and in America 
 was concerned, was this, that it gave to the 
 Johannesburg reform movement the appear- 
 ance of an attempt to bring the South African 
 Republic under the British flag, — in other 
 words, to destroy the independence of the 
 Republic. Nothing could be further from 
 the facts, as will readily be seen from the 
 following account of the Raid and the cir- 
 cumstances surrounding it. 
 
 In regard to the minor details of the Raid, 
 there exists a considerable conflict of testi- 
 mony; but the broad facts as here stated 
 represent the affair as it is set forth by a 
 majority of eye-witnesses, and as it appears 
 in the evidence laid before the Jameson Raid 
 Committee of the House of Commons. In 
 all essentials this account agrees with that of 
 92 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 Mr. J. P. Fitzpatrick, as given in his The 
 Transvaal from IVithin, 
 
 The reform movement which eventually 
 led to the Raid was originated and carried on 
 by a body called the Transvaal National 
 Union. It was composed almost entirely of 
 workingmen and mechanics ; and until with- 
 in a few weeks of the outbreak the capitalists 
 and mine-owners viewed the Union with dis- 
 favour, preferring, somewhat selfishly, to ac- 
 cept the disadvantages of bad government, 
 which did not weigh so heavily on them as 
 on their subordinates, to the great risks in- 
 volved in antagonising the Goverment by 
 continued agitation. 
 
 For some years earnest attempts were 
 made by the Union to secure redress for 
 the many grievances suffered by the popula- 
 tion of the Rand by means of representa- 
 tions and petitions to the Government. 
 
 The American inhabitants of Johannes- 
 burg made an especial attempt on their own 
 account to influence President Kruger in the 
 direction of reform ; but their eflTorts were 
 futile. After hearing what a deputation of 
 Americans had to say, he asked them, "If 
 a crisis should occur, on which side shall I 
 find the Americans ? " The deputation re- 
 
 93 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 plied, " On the side of liberty and good 
 government." The President answered, 
 " You are all tarred with the same brush : 
 you are British in your hearts." 
 
 As time passed, however, and it became 
 evident that the yoke, instead of becoming 
 lighter, was being made heavier day by day, 
 it was decided that the only hope of reform 
 lay in an exhibition of force, which, even if 
 it did not actually end in a revolution, would 
 bring home to the Boer Government the 
 great danger of its continued policy of op- 
 pression. 
 
 Before any steps were taken in this 
 direction, a final effort was made to influence 
 the Government by constitutional agitation ; 
 and a monster petition, signed by 35,700 
 Uitlanders, was laid before the Volksraad. 
 It was rejected with laughter and ridicule. 
 ^' If the Uitlanders want any rights," said 
 one member, " let them come and fight for 
 them." 
 
 At length, it was decided that an attempt 
 must be made to overthrow the Kruger Gov- 
 ernment by force. In order clearly to define 
 the causes and objects of the proposed revo- 
 lution, the National Union issued a manifesto 
 in which were set forth the grievances of the 
 
 94 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 Uitlanders, the constitutional steps which 
 had been taken to secure their redress, the 
 failure of all such attempts, and the exact 
 scope of the revolutionary movement. The 
 manifesto is too long to be given here in full. 
 Its closing sentences are these : — 
 
 " Why should the Government endeavour 
 to keep us in subjection to unjust laws by the 
 power of the sword instead of making them- 
 selves live in the heart of the people by a 
 broad policy of justice ? What can be said 
 of a policy which deliberately divides the two 
 great sections of the people from each other 
 instead of uniting them under equal laws, or 
 of the policy which keeps us in eternal tur- 
 moil with the neighbouring States ? What 
 shall be said of the state-craft, every act of 
 which sows torments, discontent, or race 
 hatred, and reveals a conception of Republi- 
 canism under which the only privilege of the 
 majority of the people is to provide the rev- 
 enue, and to bear the insult, while only those 
 are considered Republicans who speak a cer- 
 tain language and in a greater or less degree 
 share the prejudices of the ruling classes ? 
 
 " I think this policy can never succeed 
 unless men are absolutely bereft of every 
 
 95 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 quality which made their forefathers free 
 men, unless we have fallen so low that we 
 are prepared to forget honour, self-respect, 
 and our duty to our children. Once more 
 I wish to state again in unmistakable lan- 
 guage what has been so frequently stated in 
 perfect sincerity before, that we desire an 
 independent Republic which shall be a true 
 Republic, in which every man who is pre- 
 pared to take the oath of allegiance to the 
 State shall have equal rights, in which our 
 children shall be brought up side by side as 
 united members of a strong commonwealth ; 
 that we are animated by no race hatred, 
 that we desire to deprive no man, be his 
 nationality what it may, of any right. 
 
 "We want: (i) The establishment of 
 this Republic as a true Republic ; (2) A 
 Grondwet, or Constitution, which shall be 
 framed by competent persons selected by 
 representatives of the whole people and 
 framed on lines laid down by them, — a 
 Constitution which shall be safeguarded 
 against hasty alteration ; (3) An equitable 
 franchise law and fair representation ; (4) 
 Equality of the Dutch and English languages ; 
 (5) Responsibility to the legislature of the 
 heads of the great departments 5 (6) Re- 
 96 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 moval of religious disabilities ; (7) Inde- 
 pendence of the courts of justice, with 
 adequate and secured remuneration to the 
 judges; (8) Liberal and comprehensive edu- 
 cation ; (9) Efficient civil service, with 
 adequate provision for pay and pension ; 
 (10) Free trade in South African products. 
 That is what we want. There now remains 
 the question which is to be put before you 
 at the meeting of the 6th of January ; viz., 
 How shall we get it ? To this question I 
 shall expect from you an answer in plain 
 terms according to your deliberate judg- 
 ment. Charles Leonard. 
 
 Chairman of the Transvaal National Union. ^^ 
 
 Towards the end of 1895 urgent repre- 
 sentations were made to the capitalists of 
 the Rand, with the result that a few weeks 
 before the rising occurred most of these men, 
 who had hitherto held aloof from the move- 
 ment, seeing that things had reached the 
 breaking strain, threw in their lot with the 
 reformers. Mr. Cecil Rhodes was approached 
 with a request that he would allow the 
 forces of the South African Chartered Com- 
 pany to concentrate near the border of the 
 Republic, in the first instance to afford a 
 
 97 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 moral support to the revolutionists, and 
 finally, should the Johannesburgers get into a 
 tight place, to come to their assistance. To 
 this Mr. Rhodes consented ; and he gave 
 the necessary orders to Dr. Jameson, the 
 Administrator of the Chartered Company's 
 Territories. 
 
 Dr. Jameson went to Johannesburg, and 
 discussed the whole matter with the leaders. 
 The following plan was adopted. The 
 Johannesburg people were to smuggle in five 
 thousand rifles, three Maxim guns, and a 
 million rounds of ammunition. Dr. Jame- 
 son was to get together a force of fifteen 
 hundred mounted men with some Maxims 
 and field artillery, and was further to bring 
 with him fifteen hundred spare rifles. A 
 final appeal was to be made to the Govern- 
 ment ; and, if this, as was feared, should 
 prove futile, Johannesburg was to rise. 
 The first thing would be to seize the Pretoria 
 fort, which contained ten thousand rifles, a 
 dozen field pieces, and twelve million rounds 
 of ammunition, and was very poorly guarded. 
 It was hoped that, with the Pretoria fort in 
 the hands of the reformers, with Dr. Jameson 
 on the border, and with five thousand armed 
 men in Johannesburg, the revolution could 
 98 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 be effected without any actual fighting ; and 
 that the Government of the Republic would, 
 in order to avert civil war, grant those rights 
 which it had refused to petition. 
 
 Before leaving Johannesburg in Novem- 
 ber, 1895, Dr. Jameson was handed a letter 
 signed by the leaders of the movement. 
 This letter dealt briefly with the condition 
 of affairs, and concluded thus : " It is under 
 these circumstances that we feel constrained 
 to call upon you to come to our aid, should 
 a disturbance arise here. The circumstances 
 are so extreme that we cannot but believe 
 that you and the men under you will not fail 
 to come to the rescue of people who will 
 be so situated. We guarantee any expense 
 that may be reasonably incurred by you in 
 helping us, and ask you to believe that 
 nothing but the sternest necessity has 
 prompted this appeal." 
 
 The letter was left undated, and was in- 
 tended merely for use in justifying Dr. 
 Jameson in the eyes of those to whom he 
 was responsible. Dr. Jameson was in- 
 formed most emphatically that he was on 
 no account to act on this letter alone, but 
 that he was to wait for a farther letter, 
 which would be sent him, before he made 
 
 99 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 any attempt to enter the Republic with his 
 forces. It was hoped that his presence on 
 the border would be sufficient, and that no 
 further letter would have to be sent. At any 
 rate, he was solemnly urged not to move 
 unless and until he received a positive 
 request from Johannesburg. 
 
 Things stood thus when, about the middle 
 of December, 1895, the Johannesburger re- 
 formers learned that Mr. Cecil Rhodes had 
 failed to understand the stipulation made in 
 connection with calling in of Dr. Jameson : 
 namely, that no attempt was to be made to 
 overthrow the Republic as such, and to 
 bring it under the British flag, but that the 
 independence of the Republic was to be 
 maintained ; and that he looked upon this 
 simply as talk for publication. As soon as 
 this became known, a number of the leaders 
 threatened to withdraw altogether from the 
 movement unless positive assurances should 
 be given by Mr. Cecil Rhodes that, in allow- 
 ing Dr. Jameson to take part in the revo- 
 lution if he were called on, he would 
 absolutely abandon any idea that the Jo- 
 hannesburger people would attempt to bring 
 the country under the Union Jack. 
 
 These assurances were given. But in the 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 meanwhile, owing to the failure to secure 
 arms and for other reasons, it was decided 
 by the reformers that an entirely new plan 
 of campaign must be adopted. Accordingly, 
 two trusty messengers. Major Heany and 
 Captain Holden, were sent off to Dr. Jame- 
 son, one by special train and the other on 
 horseback, carrying the most positive in- 
 structions that no movement was to be 
 made. These messages were delivered to 
 Dr. Jameson in person. 
 
 Notwithstanding these messages and a 
 number of urgent telegrams, Dr. Jameson 
 took the bit between his teeth ; and on Sun- 
 day, Dec. 29, 1895, he started over the 
 border with 583 men, all told, under the 
 command of Lieutenant Colonel Sir John C. 
 VVilloughby. This action destroyed all 
 chance of success for the Johannesburgers. 
 In the words of Mr. J. P. Fitzpatrick, "The 
 reformers realised perfectly well the full sig- 
 nificance of Dr. Jameson's action. They 
 realised that, even if he succeeded in reach- 
 ing Johannesburg, he by taking the initiative 
 seriously impaired the justice of the Uit- 
 landers' cause, — indeed, put them hopelessly 
 in the wrong. Apart from the moral or 
 political aspects of the question, there was 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 the fact that, either through mistake or by 
 fatuous impulse, Dr. Jameson had plunged 
 them into a crisis for which, as he knew, 
 they were insufficiently provided and pre- 
 pared, and at the same time destroyed the 
 one chance, the one certainty, on which 
 they had always counted for arms and am- 
 munition. By starting first, he knocked out 
 the foundation of the whole scheme : he 
 made the taking of the Pretoria arsenal 
 impossible." 
 
 As soon as it became absolutely certain 
 that Jameson had started, the Johannes- 
 burgers began to put their city in a state of 
 defence. The more prominent men organ- 
 ised themselves into a Reform Committee, 
 and issued the following proclamation : 
 " Notice is hereby given that this Committee 
 adheres to the National Union manifesto, 
 and reiterates its desire to maintain the inde- 
 pendence of the Republic. The fact that 
 rumours are in course of circulation to the 
 effect that a force has crossed the Bechuana- 
 land border renders it necessary to take active 
 steps for the defence of Johannesburg and 
 the preservation of order. The Committee 
 earnestly desires that the inhabitants should 
 refrain from taking any action which can be 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 considered as an overt act of hostility against 
 the Government." 
 
 Everybody worked with a will. The first 
 necessity was to organise a police force, as 
 the Boer policemen withdrew from the town 
 in a body. This was done. Then a de- 
 fence force was got together and placed 
 under competent officers, an ambulance 
 corps was formed, and a Relief Committee 
 was established for the purpose of looking 
 after the women and children and other non- 
 combatants. This Committee was supplied 
 within half an hour of its formation with a 
 fund of ;^8o,ooo, which was used in housing 
 and feeding the women and children. In 
 order to insure good order, the Reform 
 Committee bought up all the liquor in the 
 drinking-saloons and destroyed it. 
 
 Whilst Jameson was advancing towards 
 Johannesburg, two proclamations were pub- 
 lished. The first was from President 
 Kruger. It was as follows : *' Whereas it 
 has appeared to the Government of the 
 South African Republic that there are 
 rumours' in circulation to the efl^ect that 
 earnest endeavours are being made to en- 
 danger the public safety of Johannesburg ; 
 and whereas the Government is convinced 
 
 103 
 
* THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 that, in case such rumours may contain any 
 truth, such endeavours can only emanate 
 from a small portion of the inhabitants, and 
 that the greater portion of the Johannesburg 
 inhabitants are peaceful, and are prepared to 
 support the Government in its endeavours 
 to maintain law and order, — now know you 
 that I, Stephanus Johannes Paulus Kruger, 
 State President of the South African Repub- 
 lic, with the advice and consent of the 
 Executive Council, do hereby warn these 
 evil-intentioned persons (as I do hereby urge 
 all such persons to do) to remain within the 
 pale of the law, and all such persons not 
 heeding this warning shall do so on their 
 own responsibility ; and I do further make 
 known that life and property shall be pro- 
 tected against which attempts may be made, 
 and that every peaceful inhabitant of Johan- 
 nesburg, of -'whatsoever nationality he may 
 be, is called on to support me herein, and to 
 assist the officials charged therewith. And, 
 further, be it made known that the Govern- 
 ment is still prepared to take into considera- 
 tion all grievances that may be laid before it 
 in a proper manner, and to submit the same 
 to the people of the land without delay for 
 treatment." 
 
 104 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 The other proclamation was from Sir ^ 
 Hercules Robinson, High Commissioner of 
 South Africa, and ran : " Whereas it has 
 come to my knowledge that certain British 
 subjects, said to be under the leadership of 
 Dr. Jameson, have violated the territory of 
 the South African Republic, and have cut 
 telepraph wires and done various other il- 
 legal acts ; and whereas the South African 
 Republic is a friendly State, in amity with 
 Her Majesty's Government ; and whereas it 
 is my desire to respect the independence of 
 the said State, — now, therefore, I hereby com- 
 mand the said Dr. Jameson, and all persons 
 accompanying him, to immediately retire 
 from the territory of the South African Re- 
 public on pain of the penalties attached to 
 their illegal proceedings ; and I do hereby 
 further call upon all British subjects in 
 the South African Republic to abstain from 
 giving the said Dr. Jameson any counte- 
 nance or assistance in his armed violation of 
 the territory of a friendly State." 
 
 The actual fighting between the Boers 
 and Dr. Jameson's force deserves no special 
 notice. After an engagement, which occu- 
 pied nearly two days. Sir John Willoughby 
 surrendered to Commandant Cronje at 9.15 
 105 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 on the morning of January 2, 1896. The 
 force surrendered on condition that the lives 
 of all would be spared, provided that they laid 
 down their arms and guaranteed to pay the 
 expenses incurred in connection with the 
 raid. 
 
 The conditions on which Dr. Jameson 
 surrendered were concealed from the Johan- 
 nesburgers, and the threat of dealing in a 
 summary manner with the captives was 
 used by President Kruger to induce the Jo- 
 hannesburgers to lay down their arms. In 
 other words, although President Kruger 
 knew that, under the terms of surrender, he 
 could not commit any act of violence on the 
 persons of the prisoners, he continually led 
 the Reform Committee to understand that 
 the lives of Jameson and his men were in 
 the hands of the Johannesburgers, thus mak- 
 ing it impossible for them to refuse the 
 terms he offered. 
 
 Sir Hercules Robinson, the High Com- 
 missioner of South Africa, went to Pretoria 
 to assist President Kruger in setting things 
 straight ; and one of the most unaccountable 
 things in connection with the negotiations 
 which took place between the Reform Com- 
 mittee, Sir Hercules Robinson, and the agents 
 106 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 of the South African Republic, is the appar- 
 ent entire desertion of the Uitlanders by the 
 High Commissioner. This may be best 
 understood by reading the telegrams and 
 other communications addressed by Sir Her- 
 cules Robinson to the Johannesburgers and 
 to the Colonial Office. First we have a 
 telegram marked " urgent/* addressed to the 
 British agent in Johannesburg : " You should 
 inform the Johannesburg people that I con- 
 sider that, if they lay down their arms, they 
 will be acting loyally and honourably, and 
 that, if they do not comply with my request, 
 they forfeit all claim to sympathy from Her 
 Majesty's Government and from British 
 subjects throughout the world, as the lives 
 of Jameson and the prisoners are now prac- 
 tically in their hands." From this we see 
 that Sir Hercules Robinson had not even 
 taken the trouble to inquire on what terms 
 Jameson had surrendered. The next tele- 
 gram which interests us is one to Mr. 
 Chamberlain, dated Jan. 7, 1896: "I need 
 only now say that I have just received a 
 message from Reform Committee, resolving 
 to comply with demand of South African 
 Republic to lay down their arms ; the people 
 placing themselves and their interests unre- 
 107 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 servedly in my hands in the fullest confi- 
 dence that I will see justice done them. . . . 
 I hope now to be able to confer with the 
 President of the South African Republic and 
 Executive Council as to prisoners and the 
 redress of Johannesburg grievances." On 
 the next day the High Commissioner tele- 
 graphed to Mr. Chamberlain : " I shall try 
 to-day to make arrangements with Kruger as 
 to taking over of prisoners ; and I will confer 
 with him as to redressing the grievances of 
 the residents of Johannesburg. ... I intend, 
 if I find that the Johannesburg people have 
 substantially complied with the ultimatum, 
 to insist on the fulfilment of promises as re- 
 gards prisoners and consideration of griev- 
 ances." 
 
 Surely, after these repeated assurances the 
 Johannesburgers had reason to believe that 
 their grievances would be considered. But 
 Sir Hercules Robinson, as soon as he had 
 arranged about the delivery of Dr. Jameson's 
 force to the British authorities, left Pretoria 
 without even discussing the grievances with 
 President Kruger or making any attempt to 
 hold the latter to the promises contained in 
 his proclamation of December 30. 
 
 But on the two following days, Jan. 9 
 108 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 and 10, 1896, about sixty members of the 
 Reform Committee were arrested and con- 
 veyed to Pretoria ; and not only did the High 
 Commissioner fail to see these men and get 
 their account of the circumstances attending 
 the raid, but he expressed his desire, equiva- 
 lent to an order, to the British Resident that 
 that official would not communicate with the 
 prisoners until he had left Pretoria. But 
 iMr. Chamberlain was by no means in sym- 
 pathy with this entire neglect to deal with 
 the grievances which were, after all, the cause 
 of the whole trouble ; and he telegraphed 
 to Sir Hercules Robinson on January 15: 
 " The people of Johannesburg laid down 
 their arms in the belief that reasonable con- 
 cessions would be arranged by your interven- 
 tion ; and, until these are granted or are 
 definitely promised to you by the President, 
 the root-causes of the present troubles will 
 remain. The President has again and again 
 promised reform, . . . and grave dissatisfac- 
 tion would be excited if you left Pretoria 
 without a clear understanding on these 
 points. Her Majesty's Government invite 
 President Kruger, in the interests of South 
 African Republic and of peace, to make a 
 full declaration on these matters. ... It will 
 109 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 be your duty to use firm language, and' to 
 tell the President that neglect to meet the 
 admitted grievances of the Uitlanders by giv- 
 ing a definite promise to propose reasonable 
 concessions would have a disastrous effect 
 upon the prospects of a lasting and satisfac- 
 tory settlement." 
 
 But Sir Hercules Robinson had already 
 left Pretoria. His action in leaving the Re- 
 public at the very moment w^hen his efforts 
 might have been so profitably turned towards 
 the removal of the grievances which had 
 been at the bottom of the outbreak can have 
 no justification. Reforms which might have 
 been easily arranged then were not even dis- 
 cussed : the Republic was treated to another 
 exhibition of British incompetence ; and Pres- 
 ident Kruger was given one more reason to 
 believe that he could continue to laugh in 
 security at the attempts of Great Britain to se- 
 cure justice for her subjects in the Transvaal. 
 As a contributing cause to the present war, 
 the conduct of Sir Hercules Robinson must 
 be set down by the side of Mr. Gladstone's 
 surrender of 1881. 
 
 Dr. Jameson and his ofiicers were sent to 
 England, where they were tried under the 
 Foreign Enlistments Act, and sentenced to 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 various terms of imprisonment. It would be 
 useless to describe the treatment of the 
 members of the Reform Committee after 
 their arrest, to tell how these men, a large 
 proportion of whom were men of refinement 
 and education, were herded together as 
 though they were the lowest of black felons ; 
 how one prisoner, suffering from fever and 
 dysentery, was locked up for twelve hours in 
 a cell nine feet long by five feet six inches 
 wide with four other men, and left unpro- 
 vided with sanitary provisions of any kind ; 
 how by means of liberal bribes the prisoners 
 at last secured their own clothing and the 
 right to purchase food outside the jail ; or 
 how the wives and sisters of the prisoners 
 were kept day after day standing for hours 
 outside the jail waiting until the jailer should 
 condescend to inspect their passes. The 
 story is too painful to bear repetition. 
 Those who would know the horrible details 
 of that imprisonment should read Mr. Fitz- 
 patrick's book and Mrs. Lionel Phillips's 
 Some South African Recollections, 
 
 The indictment served on the prisoners 
 contained four counts: (i) That they had 
 wrongfully, unlawfully, and with a hostile 
 intention to disturb, injure, or bring into 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 danger the independence or safety of the Re- 
 public, treated, conspired, agreed with, and 
 urged Leander Starr Jameson ... to come 
 into the territory of the Republic at the head 
 of and with an armed and hostile troop, and 
 to make a hostile invasion, and to march 
 through to Johannesburg. (2) That they 
 had " armed troops ready to assist, and sent 
 assistance to him, and subsequently by sedi- 
 tious speeches made, or caused to be made, in 
 public, with the object to persuade and in- 
 duce the people there to stand by the afore- 
 mentioned Jameson in his hostile invasion, 
 and further assisted him, the afore-mentioned 
 Jameson, during his hostile invasion above 
 mentioned, by providing him with provisions, 
 forage, and horses. (3) That they had dis- 
 tributed arms, had enrolled men, had formed 
 military companies, and had erected fortifica- 
 tions. (4) That they had arrogated to 
 themselves and had exercised functions and 
 powers belonging to the Republic, in that 
 they organised a police force, appointed a 
 head officer of the force, and intrusted him 
 with jurisdiction in police cases. 
 
 After a good deal of discussion between 
 the State Attorney of the South African Re- 
 public and Mr. Wessels, chief advocate for 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 the prisoners, the State Attorney offered that, 
 if the four leaders, Lionel Phillips, Francis 
 Rhodes, John Hayes Hammond, and George 
 p^arrar, would plead guilty to the first count, 
 he would accept a plea of guilty on counts 
 three and four from the other prisoners, and 
 that he would not press for an exemplary 
 sentence against the leaders. This offer was 
 accepted in good faith by the prisoners. In- 
 stead of allowing the cases to come up be- 
 fore the High Court in the ordinary way, the 
 Government imported a judge from the 
 Orange Free State, a Mr. Gregorowski, who 
 was known to be hostile to the prisoners, 
 who, indeed, had boasted before he arrived at 
 Pretoria that he would make short work of 
 the rebels. 
 
 The trial of the prisoners was in some 
 respects one of the most remarkable of the 
 century. They had pleaded guilty by ar- 
 rangement with the State Attorney, who had 
 promised that in consideration of the plea he 
 would not press for exemplary punishment. 
 Accordingly, no evidence was heard against 
 the prisoners. The plea of guilty was ac- 
 cepted, and the prisoners' counsel made an 
 eloquent appeal to the judge. At the con- 
 clusion of this address the State Attorney 
 
THE ANGLO-^BOER CONFLICT 
 
 rose, and in a most violent speech demanded 
 that the utmost penalty under the Roman- 
 Dutch law — that is, death — should be 
 passed on the leaders. I continue the narra- 
 tive in the words of Mr. Fitzpatrick, who 
 was present at the trial : " The usual question 
 as to whether there were any reasons why 
 sentence of death should not be passed upon 
 them having been put and the usual reply in 
 the negative having been received, in the 
 midst of silence that was only disturbed by 
 the breaking down of persons in various 
 parts of the hall — officials, burghers, and 
 in the general public — sentence of death 
 was passed, first on Mr. Lionel Phillips, 
 next on Colonel Rhodes, then on Mr. 
 George Farrar, and lastly on Mr. Hammond. 
 The bearing of the four men won for them 
 universal sympathy and approval, especially 
 under the conditions immediately following 
 the death sentence, when a most painful 
 scene took place in court. Evidences of 
 feeling came from all parts of the room and 
 from all classes of people, — from those who 
 conducted the defence and from the Boers 
 who were to have constituted the jury. 
 The interpreter, translating the sentence, 
 broke down. Many of the minor officials 
 
■^NIVERsii 
 THE JAMESON RAI]^^c>iL,pc>atj^ 
 
 [jJJt^ 
 
 lost control of themselves ; and feelings were 
 further strained by the incident of one man 
 falling insensible. 
 
 " Sentence was next passed upon the 
 other prisoners. They were condemned to 
 suffer two years' imprisonment, to pay a fine 
 of ;^2,ooo each, or, as an alternative, sufFer 
 another year's imprisonment, and thereafter 
 to be banished from the State for a period of 
 three years. . . . After passing the minor sen- 
 tences, the judge gave a short address to the 
 burghers, in which he thanked them for 
 their attendance, and made allusion with 
 evident signs of satisfaction to the 
 manner in which the trial had been 
 brought to a conclusion. A long delay 
 followed, during which the judge proceeded 
 to note his judgments. Once his attention 
 was drawn by a remark of an official, to 
 which he replied promptly, at the same time 
 breaking into a broad smile, but suddenly 
 recollecting the circumstances and the pres- 
 ence of the men sentenced to death, placed 
 his hand over his mouth and wiped the 
 smile away. . . . One more incident — trifling 
 perhaps in itself, but leaving an ineffaceable 
 impression — occurred during the march to 
 the gaol. As the prisoners slowly approached 
 
 115 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 the Government buildings, Dr. Leyds, ac- 
 companied by one friend, walked out until 
 within a few yards of the procession of sen- 
 tenced men (a great proportion of whom 
 were personally known to him), and stood 
 there with his hands in his pockets, smiling 
 at them as they went past." 
 
 The life of the prisoners in jail was 
 terrible. Not only were they fed like Kaf- 
 firs and crowded into small and ill-venti- 
 lated cells, but they were forced to witness 
 the flogging and torture of a number of 
 native prisoners. One man broke down 
 under the strain, and committed suicide. 
 
 The circumstances under which the pris- 
 oners had been convicted, and the treatment 
 whilst in jail, caused a wave of indignation 
 to sweep over the whole of South Africa. 
 Representations were made to President 
 Kruger by the inhabitants of several hun- 
 dred towns in the Cape, in Natal, in the 
 Transvaal, and in the Orange Free State ; and 
 a deputation consisting of the mayors of more 
 than two hundred towns set out for Pretoria 
 with the purpose of prevailing on the Presi- 
 dent to change the sentences. Finally, when 
 the pressure of public sentiment became so 
 strong as to suggest the outbreak of another 
 ii6 
 
THE JAMESON RAID 
 
 revolt, and after the prisoners had been 
 sounded as to what sums they were prepared 
 to pay for their liberty, President Kruger 
 altered the sentences to a fine of ;^25,ooo 
 for each of the four leaders and a fine of 
 ;^2,ooo each for the others. The total sum 
 paid by the prisoners to the South African 
 Republic exceeded ;^ 1,000,000. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain informed the South 
 African Republic that, if it would send in an 
 account of the damages caused by the Raid, 
 he would call on the South African Char- 
 tered Company to pay the Republic what- 
 ever sums had been expended in connection 
 with the invasion. In reply the Republic 
 presented a bill for ;£^i,677,938, equal to 
 about $8,000,000. The bill was divided 
 under two heads, — Material Damages, 
 ;^677,938; and Moral or Intellectual Dam- 
 ages, ;^ 1, 000,000. Mr. Chamberlain de- 
 clined to consider the claim for moral and 
 intellectual damages, and asked that details of 
 the expenditure under the other head should 
 be furnished. When these details came to 
 hand, it was found that many of the items 
 were absurd. For instance, ;^2,423, equal 
 to ;^ 1 2,000, was charged for shoeing horses. 
 This claim appears ridiculous in view of the 
 117 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 fact that the Raid only occupied four days. 
 Again, £^yig^^ equal to ;g20,ooo, was 
 asked for carts and horses, no account being 
 taken of the fact that these supplies re- 
 mained the property of the Republic. 
 
 The South African Chartered Company, 
 however, expressed its readiness to pay all 
 expenses for which vouchers were produced. 
 The vouchers were never forwarded, and 
 there the matter of compensation rests. 
 
 ii8 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 As might naturally be expected, the lot of 
 the Uitlanders, after the Jameson Raid, 
 became harder and harder, notwithstanding 
 the fact that President Kruger solemnly 
 promised, after Jameson's men had laid down 
 their arms, that he would inquire into and 
 redress their grievances. At length, on 
 March 24, 1899, a petition signed by 21,648 
 Uitlanders was forwarded by the High 
 Commissioner to Her Majesty, praying that 
 she would intervene to secure just treatment 
 for the British Uitlanders. 
 
 The chief grounds for the petition were 
 stated to be : the failure of President Kru- 
 ger to institute the reforms promised after 
 the Jameson Raid ; the continuation of 
 the dynamite monopoly and its attendant 
 grievances, notwithstanding the fact that 
 a government commission, consisting of 
 officials of the Republic, had inquired into 
 the matter and suggested many reforms; 
 the subjugation of the High Court to the 
 executive authority, and the dismissal of 
 the Chief Justice for his earnest protest 
 against the interference with the Court's 
 independence ; the selection of none but 
 119 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 burghers to sit on juries ; the aggressive 
 attitude of the police towards the Uitlanders ; 
 the continued outrages on the persons and 
 property of British subjects ; taxation with- 
 out representation ; and the withholding of 
 educational privileges from the children of 
 Uitlanders. These grievances I have dealt 
 with in a previous chapter. After some 
 correspondence between the two Govern- 
 ments, and a friendly suggestion from the 
 President of the Orange Free State, a con- 
 ference was arranged between Sir Alfred 
 Milner, the High Commissioner of South 
 Africa, and President Kruger. The con- 
 ference took place at Bloomfontein, the 
 capital of the Orange Free State, and lasted 
 from May 31 to June 5. I have before me 
 a verbatim report of the proceedings. 
 
 The position taken by Sir Alfred Milner 
 was that there were a number of open ques- 
 tions between the two Governments, which 
 increased in importance as time went on, 
 and that the tone of the controversy was 
 becoming more acute. There were two 
 methods by which things could be settled : 
 one was by giving the Uitlanders such fair 
 proportion of representation in the first 
 Volksraad as would enable them to work 
 
BLOOMFONTEIN CONFERENCE 
 
 out gradually the needed reforms ; the other, 
 for the Government of Great Britain to 
 adopt that course which, in similar circum- 
 stances, would be adopted in regard to griev- 
 ances of British subjects in any country, 
 even in a country not under specified con- 
 ventional obligations to Her Majesty's Gov- 
 ernment, — that is, by raising each point 
 separately, and showing how the intense 
 discontent of British subjects stood in the 
 way of that friendly relation which it was 
 desired should exist between the two Gov- 
 ernments. Of these two methods. Sir 
 Alfred Milner thought that the former 
 would be the better; for if a fair franchise 
 were granted to the Uitlanders most of the 
 questions pending between the two Govern- 
 ments could be dropped as specific issues, 
 and the remaining ones could be settled by 
 friendly discussion. If he could persuade 
 President Kruger to grant a fair franchise, — 
 not as a right which could be claimed under 
 the Conventions, but as a concession calcu- 
 lated to remove serious elements of discord, 
 — al/ that was needed to set things right 
 would then be effected by a movement 
 within the State, the danger of continual 
 and irritating pressure from outside would 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 be removed, and the independence of the 
 Republic would be strengthened. Sir Alfred 
 Milner pointed out that the existing fran- 
 chise law compelled an alien, after renounc- 
 ing allegiance to his own Government, to 
 wait twelve years before he was granted 
 citizenship in the Transvaal, and that even 
 then there was much uncertainty whether he 
 would get the franchise. It was to be re- 
 called that those men who had come into 
 the Republic in 1886, and had been prom- 
 ised citizenship at the end of five years, 
 were informed, just before the term of five 
 years ended, that the law had been changed, 
 and they would have to wait seven years 
 longer. 
 
 Sir Alfred Milner then proposed that the 
 franchise should be granted to every white 
 man who had been five years in the country, 
 and was prepared to take oath to obey the 
 laws, to undertake all the obligations of citi- 
 zenship, and to defend the independence of 
 the country, it being understood that by 
 taking such an oath he renounced his citi- 
 zenship of any other country. A property 
 qualification and good character were to be 
 conditions. The assertion has been fre- 
 quently made that Sir Alfred Milner wished 
 
BLOOMFONTEIN CONFERENCE 
 
 to secure the citizenship of the Transvaal 
 for British subjects under conditions which 
 would still allow them to remain British sub- 
 jects. 
 
 This statement is so absurd on the face 
 of it that it seems scarcely to deserve notice. 
 But, as it has been so persistently repeafed, I 
 may point out that under no law that exists 
 or . ever has existed in any country can a 
 man who has taken an oath of allegiance to 
 one State claim at the same time citizenship 
 of another State. There was, it is true, 
 some discussion as to the exact wording of 
 the proposed oath of allegiance ; but it must 
 be remembered in this connection that Sir 
 Alfred Milner was not making a demand for 
 the franchise, but merely suggesting to Presi- 
 dent Kruger certain conditions under which 
 Great Britain would be prepared to abandon 
 the attempt to secure redress for hundreds 
 of specific grievances suffered by British sub- 
 jects in the Republic. He did not say, 
 " You must give me oath of allegiance of a 
 certain kind,'* but, " If you care to give me 
 an oath of this kind, I would accept it as a 
 solution of the difficulties we are discuss- 
 mg. 
 
 In order to leave no doubt in the minds 
 123 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 of my readers as to what Sir Alfred Milner 
 proposed in regard to franchise, I quote his 
 exact words as given in the Transvaal Green 
 Book, in which the Bloomfontein Confer- 
 ence was reported : — 
 
 <« Wednesday, May 31, 1899. 
 '' The High Commissioner, — I must en- 
 deavour to make my position clear with 
 regard to what we are now discussing, for 
 according to my opinion the franchise is an 
 important part of the subject. I object to 
 the position of the franchise as it exists at 
 present, and that utterly, — particularly to 
 that point to which I will refer first ; 
 namely, I consider it unreasonable to ask a 
 man to forswear citizenship, when he does 
 not in reality get anything in place of the 
 rejected allegiance. And I consider it super- 
 fluous to demand from such person more 
 than an oath of allegiance, and a willingness 
 to obey the laws and to defend the inde- 
 pendence, as it is well known and certain 
 that the taking of that oath robs him of his 
 then existing burghership." 
 
 In reply to this proposal. President Kruger 
 urged that the Uitlanders did not want the 
 franchise, and would not take it on any 
 124 
 
 /a 
 
BLOOMFONTEIN CONFERENCE 
 
 terms j and, also, that, if he granted Sir 
 Alfred Milner's request, the country would 
 be controlled by foreigners, and all power 
 taken from the old burghers, — propositions 
 which are mutually destructive. But on the 
 third day of the conference President Kruger 
 himself presented a new franchise proposal. 
 This was passed by the Volksraad at once, 
 before the British authorities had any time to 
 examine it. After it was published, it 
 appeared on its very face so full of intrica- 
 cies that its effect as a measure of reform 
 was a matter of serious doubt. Under its 
 terms an alien could apparently secure the 
 franchise in seven years, but the conditions 
 were so complicated that to fulfil them was 
 impossible. To give only one example : A 
 man who desired the franchise must first 
 signify his intention in writing to the 
 Fieldcornet, the Landdrost, and the State 
 Secretary. Two years later he might 
 become naturalised (without receiving full 
 burgher rights), provided he produced a 
 certificate, signed by the Fieldcornet, the 
 Landdrost, and the commandant of the 
 district, to the effect that he had never 
 broken any of the laws of the Republic. If 
 these officials were not sufficiently well- 
 125 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 acquainted with the private life of the appli- 
 cant to grant such a certificate, then a 
 sworn statement to the same effect from two 
 prominent full burghers would suffice. At 
 the termination of another five years the 
 applicant, having six months previously sig- 
 nified his intentions in writing to the Field- 
 cornet, the Landdrost, and the State Secre- 
 tary, might apply for the full franchise. He 
 must then furnish the certificate alluded 
 to above. This, together with his applica- 
 tion, must be indorsed by the Fieldcornet 
 and the Landdrost. Both were then to be 
 passed to the State Secretary, who should 
 hand them on to the State Attorney, who 
 should return them with a legal opinion to 
 the State Secretary. If the opinion were 
 favourable, the man might be granted the full 
 franchise. If not, the matter was to be re- 
 ferred to the Executive Council. 
 
 If this account appears involved, I can 
 only refer my readers to the law itself, when 
 it will be seen that I have selected for ex- 
 planation by no means the most complicated 
 conditions. 
 
 It must be noted that the law contains no 
 compelling clauses. Under the conditions 
 set forth the Uitlander may be granted the 
 126 
 
AFTER THE CONFERENCE 
 
 franchise. Nowhere does the law say that 
 after fulfilling the conditions he shall have 
 the franchise. It is all left finally to the 
 mere will of the officials charged with the 
 carrying out of the law. 
 
 In view of the opinion expressed by Sir 
 Alfred Milner and prominent Uitlanders, 
 that on the face of it the law appeared 
 almost unworkable, Mr, Chamberlain tele- 
 graphed, asking for the appointment of 
 delegates from the Transvaal and from the 
 British side to discuss the new law, to see 
 if it would, as a matter of fact, effect the 
 needed reforms. To Mr. Chamberlain's 
 request for a joint inquiry the Transvaal 
 Government sent a reply in which nothing 
 was said about the joint inquiry, but in 
 which a proposal was made for a new fran- 
 chise law. The basis of the new proposal 
 was a five years* retrospective franchise. 
 The following conditions, which I take 
 verbatim from the Transvaal Government's 
 official translation of its note, were attached : 
 The proposals of this Government regarding 
 questions of franchise and representation 
 must be regarded as expressly conditional 
 on Her Majesty's Government consenting 
 to the points set forth in paragraph five of 
 127 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 that despatch, namely : (a) In future not to 
 interfere in internal affairs of the South Afri- 
 can Republic, {b) Not to insist further on 
 its assertion of existence of suzerainty, {c) 
 To agree to arbitration. Further, it was ex- 
 plicitly stated by the State Attorney that 
 these offers could only be understood to 
 stand if England decided not to press her 
 request for a joint inquiry into the political 
 representation of the Uitlanders. There 
 can be no doubt about this rejection of the 
 joint inquiry, for the draft of the telegram 
 in which the British agent conveyed the 
 suggestions to Sir Alfred Milner was ini- 
 tialed by the State Attorney himself. 
 
 In reply, Mr. Chamberlain said he was 
 prepared to waive the joint inquiry if the 
 British agent, assisted by competent men, 
 should be allowed to investigate the terms 
 of the proposal. In regard to intervention. 
 Her Majesty's Government hoped that the 
 fulfilment of the promises made, and the 
 just treatment of the Uitlanders in future, 
 would render unnecessary any further inter- 
 vention on their behalf; but they could not, 
 of course, debar themselves from their rights 
 under the Conventions nor divest themselves 
 of the ordinary obligations of a civilised 
 128 
 
AFTER THE CONFERENCE 
 
 power to protect its subjects in a foreign 
 country from injustice. As to the suzer- 
 ainty, the condition imposed could not be 
 accepted, as Her Majesty's Government 
 were of opinion that the contention of the 
 South African Republic to be a sovereign in- 
 ternational State was not warranted either 
 by law or by history, and was entirely inad- 
 missible. In reference to arbitration, Mr. 
 Chamberlain agreed to the discussion of the 
 form and scope of such a tribunal, and sug- 
 gested an early conference. 
 
 The Transvaal replied that it regretted 
 the refusal of Her Majesty's Government 
 to accept the conditions annexed to the 
 latest franchise proposals, which proposals 
 it now withdrew. The Transvaal having 
 refused the joint inquiry into the working 
 of the seven years' franchise law, nothing 
 was left between the two parties but Sir 
 Alfred Milner's proposal put forth at Bloom- 
 fontein. However, Mr. Chamberlain made 
 one more effort for a peaceful settlement. 
 In a despatch dated Sept. 9, 1899, he 
 stated that Her Majesty's Government was 
 still willing to accept the Transvaal's offer 
 of a five years' franchise, without the condi- 
 tions attached j that the acceptance of this 
 129 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 offer would at once remove the tension be- 
 tween the two Governments, and would in 
 all probability render unnecessary any further 
 intervention on the part of Her Majesty's 
 Government to secure the redress of the 
 Uitlander grievances; further, that such 
 questions as remained for settlement between 
 the two Governments — those which were 
 neither Uitlander questions nor questions of 
 interpretation of the Conventions — might 
 be referred to a tribunal of arbitration. If 
 the answer, however, to this last proposal 
 was negative or inconclusive, Her Majesty's 
 Government would reserve the right to re- 
 consider the situation de novo^ and to for- 
 mulate their own proposals for a final settle- 
 ment. 
 
 On Sept. 22, 1899, Mr. Chamberlain 
 telegraphed to Sir Alfred Milner, " Her 
 Majesty's Government have on more than 
 one occasion repeated their assurances that 
 they have no desire to interfere in any way 
 with the independence of the South African 
 Republic, provided that the conditions on 
 which it was granted are honourably observed 
 in the spirit and in the letter; and they have 
 offered as part of a general settlement to 
 give a complete guarantee against any attack 
 
 130 
 
THE BOER ULTIMATUM 
 
 upon that independence, either from within 
 any part of the British dominions or from 
 the territory of a foreign State." Sir Alfred 
 Milner was instructed to communicate this 
 to the Government of the South African 
 Republic. 
 
 The Republic rejected Mr. Chamberlain's 
 qualified acceptance of the five-year fran- 
 chise and his assurances that Great Britain 
 had no designs on the independence of the 
 country. Then followed a period during 
 which both sides began to prepare for hos- 
 tilities. It seems impossible to determine 
 which side took the first step in this direc- 
 tion. The British authorities at the Cape 
 declare that they received positive informa- 
 tion that the troops of the Republic were 
 being concentrated on the Natal border, and 
 that as a measure of self-defence it was 
 necessary to re-enforce the British outposts 
 and send for more regiments. The Repub- 
 lic, on the other hand, place the facts the 
 other way. 
 
 On the 9th of October, 1899, whilst the 
 British Government was still considering the 
 nature of the fresh proposals for a settlement 
 which it intended to lay before the Republic, 
 President Kruger, through his State Secre- 
 
 131 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 tary, issued the following ultimatum : " (a) 
 That all points of mutual difference shall 
 be regulated by the friendly course of arbitra- 
 tion or by whatever amicable way may be 
 agreed upon by this Government with Her 
 Majesty's Government. (^) That the troops 
 on the borders of this Republic shall be in- 
 stantly withdrawn, (r) That all re-enforce- 
 ments of troops which have arrived in South 
 Africa since the ist of June, 1899, shall be 
 removed from South Africa within a reason- 
 able time, to be agreed upon with this Gov- 
 ernment, and with a mutual assurance and 
 guarantee on the part of this Government 
 that no attack upon or hostilities against any 
 portion of the possessions of the British 
 Government shall be made by the Republic 
 during further negotiations within a period 
 of time to be subsequently agreed upon be- 
 tween the Governments ; and this Govern- 
 ment will, on compliance therewith, be 
 prepared to withdraw the armed burghers of 
 this Republic from the borders, (d) That 
 Her Majesty's troops which are now on the 
 high seas shall not be landed in any port in 
 South Africa. 
 
 " This Government must press for an im- 
 mediate and affirmative answer to these four 
 
 132 
 
THE BOER ULTIMATUM 
 
 questions, and earnestly requests Her Maj- 
 esty's Government to return such an answer 
 before or upon Wednesday, the nth of 
 October, 1899, not later than five o'clock 
 P.M. ; and it desires further to add that, in the 
 event of unexpectedly no satisfactory answer 
 being received by it within that interval, it 
 will with great regret be compelled to re- 
 gard the action of Her Majesty's Govern- 
 ment as a formal declaration of war, and 
 will not hold itself responsible for the con- 
 sequences thereof; and that, in the event of 
 any further movements of troops taking 
 place within the above-mentioned time in 
 the nearer directions of our borders, this 
 Government will be compelled to regard 
 that, also, as a formal declaration of war." 
 
 This brief narrative of the history and 
 causes of the Anglo-Boer Conflict may be 
 brought to a close by the transcription of 
 two telegrams from Mr. Chamberlain to Sir 
 Alfred Milner. The first is dated Oct. 10, 
 1899, ^"d runs: "Her Majesty's Govern- 
 ment have received with great regret the per- 
 emptory demands of the Government of the 
 South African Republic. You will inform 
 the Government of the South African Repub- 
 lic, in reply, that the conditions demanded 
 
 ^33 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 by the Government of the South African Re- 
 public are such as Her Majesty's Govern- 
 ment deem it impossible to discuss." 
 
 The second telegram is dated Oct. ii, 
 1899. "Most urgent. Inform British 
 agent in South African Republic that the 
 Government of the United States has been 
 asked to allow their consul to take charge 
 of agency. Let British agent try to arrange 
 accordingly pending reply." 
 
 The Boer ultimatum expired at five 
 o'clock on the nth of October, 1899, and 
 within a few hours the troops of the Repub- 
 lic invaded the British Colony of Natal. 
 
 Hostilities are still in progress as I write. 
 Before they are concluded, thousands of 
 brave Boers, thousands of brave British 
 soldiers, will have laid down their lives. 
 And the cause of it all, in a word, the fatu- 
 ous attempt of one man to govern a Republic 
 at the end of the nineteenth century by the 
 methods of the seventeenth. 
 
 134 
 
APPENDIX 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 The following is a list of the principal 
 sources from which I have drawn the infor- 
 mation contained in this volume. Official 
 publications are-not included. 
 
 BOOKS. 
 
 Aylward, Alfred. The Transvaal of To-day. Edinburgh, 
 1878. 
 
 Bartlett, Sir .Ellis Ashmzad. The Transvaal Crisis. 
 London, 1896. 
 
 Becker, George Ferdinand. The Witwatersrand and the 
 Revolt of the Uitlanders. Washington, 1896. 
 
 Bryce, James. Impressions of South Africa. New York, 
 1897. 
 
 Carter, Thomas Fortescue. A Narrative of the Boer 
 War : Its Causes and Results. London, 1883. 
 
 Chesson, F. W. The Dutch Boers and Slavery in the Trans- 
 vaal : A Letter to R. W. Fowler, Esq., M.P. Lon- 
 don, 1869. 
 
 Davis, Richard Harding. Dr. Jameson*s Raiders v. The 
 Johannesburg Reformers. New York, 1897. 
 
 De Fremery, James. Reflections on Jameson's Raid. Oak- 
 land, Cal., 1896. 
 
 Ellis, Alfred Burdon. South AfHcan Sketches. London, 
 1887. 
 
 Fisher, W. E. Garrett. The Transvaal and the Boers. 
 London, 1896. 
 
 Fitzpatrick, J. P. The Transvaal from Within. New 
 York, 1899. 
 
 Froude, James Anthony. Two Lectures on South Africa. 
 London, 1880. 
 
 GiBBs, Edw. J. England and South Africa. London, 1889. 
 
 Green, Elsa Goodwin. Raiders and Rebels in South 
 Africa. London, 1898. 
 
 ^37 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 Haggard, H. Rider. Cetywayo and his White Neighbours. 
 London, 1882. 
 
 Hammond, Mrs. John Hays. A Woman's Part in a Revo- 
 lution. New York, 1897. 
 
 HiLLEGAS, Howard C. Oom Paul's People. New York, 
 1899. 
 
 HiLLiER, Alfred P. Raid and Reform. London, 1898. 
 
 "Imperialist.'* Cecil Rhodes. London, 1897. 
 
 Johnston, Sir H. H. A History of the Colonisation of 
 Africa by Alien Races. Cambridge, England, 1899. 
 
 King, Rev. James. Dr. Jameson's Raid : Its Causes and 
 Consequences. London, 1896. 
 
 Little, James Stanley. South Africa : A Sketch Book of 
 Men, Manners, and Facts. London, 1884. 
 
 Little, W. J. Knox. Sketches and Studies in South Africa. 
 London, 1899. 
 
 Livingstone, David. The Transvaal Boers. Edinburgh, 
 1881. 
 
 Matthews, Josiah Wright. Incwadi Yami j or, Twenty 
 Years' Personal Experience in South Africa. London, 
 1887. 
 
 Molteno, Percy Alport. A Federal South Africa. Lon- 
 don, 1896. 
 
 Nixon, John. The Complete Story of the Transvaal. Lon- 
 don, 1885. 
 
 Noble, John. South Africa, Past and Present. London, 
 
 1877. 
 
 Phillips, Mrs. Lionel. Some South African Recollections. 
 London, 1899. 
 
 Proctor, John. Boers and Little Englanders. London, 
 1897. 
 
 Statham, F. Reginald. Blacks, Boers, and British. Lon- 
 don, 1 88 1. 
 
 . Paul Kruger and his Times. London, 1898. 
 
 Theal, George McCall. History of South Africa. 5 vols. 
 London, 1888-93. 
 
 . History of the Boers in South Africa. London, 1888. 
 
 138 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 ARTICLES FROM MAGAZINES AND REVIEWS. 
 
 The Nineteenth Century Magazine. 
 
 The Prospect in South Africa. By the Right Hon. Earl 
 Grey. Vol. 21. 1887. pp. 428-451. 
 
 South Africa as it is. By John Robinson. Vol. 21. 1887. 
 pp. 883-900. 
 
 In Praise of the Boers. By H. A. Bryden. Vol. 39. 
 1896. pp. 381-389. 
 
 The True Motive and Reason of Dr. Jameson's Raid. By 
 G. Seymour Fort. Vol. 39. 1896. pp. 871-880. 
 
 British Suzerainty in the Transvaal. By Edward Dicey. 
 Vol. 42. 1897. pp. 663-672. 
 
 The Real Grievances of the Uitlanders. By H. M. Mey- 
 sey-Thompson. Vol. 43. 1898. pp. 312-327. 
 
 The ** Casus Belli" in South Africa. By Edmund Rob- 
 ertson. Vol. 46. 1899. pp. 334-344. 
 
 The Situation in South Africa : A Voice from Cape Colony. 
 By Rev. C. Usher Wilson. Vol. 46. 1899. pp. 
 522-526. 
 
 The ^arterly Revieiv, 
 
 The Liberals and South Africa. A Review of Vols, i, 2, 
 and 3 of Mr. C. P. Lucas's Historical Geography of 
 the British Colonies. Article 7 in Vol. 178. 1894. 
 
 PP- 435-459. 
 The Transvaal Trouble : How it arose. Being an Extract 
 from the Biography of the late Sir Bartle Frere. By 
 John Martineau. Article 9 in Vol. 184. 1896. 
 pp. 532-563- 
 
 The Contemporary Review. 
 
 The Expansion of South Africa. By John Mackenzie. 
 
 Vol. 56. 1889. pp. 753-776. 
 The English Government and the Boers. By W. Basil 
 
 WoRSFOLD. Vol. 69. 1896. pp. 473-483- 
 German Intrigues in the Transvaal. By W. R. Lawson. 
 
 Vol. 69. 1896. pp. 292-304. 
 
 139 
 
THE ANGLO-BOER CONFLICT 
 
 The Conservatism of President Kruger. By Herbert Paul. 
 Vol. 76. 1899. pp. 1-13. 
 
 The British Power in South Africa. By Sir Charles War- 
 ren. Vol. 76. 1899. pp. 609-627. 
 
 The Cause of the War. By Percy A. Molteno. Vol. 76. 
 1899. pp. 637-647. 
 
 The Inevitable in South Africa. By F. Edmund Garrett. 
 Vol. 76. 1899. pp. 457-481. 
 
 The North American Review. 
 
 Problems of the Transvaal. By Karl Blind. Vol. 162. 
 
 1896. pp. 457-472. 
 South Africa and its Future. By John Hays Hammond. 
 
 Vol. 164. 1897. pp. 233-248. 
 England and the Transvaal. By Sydney Brooks. Vol. 169. 
 
 1899. pp. 62-76. 
 A Vindication of the Boers. A Rejoinder to Mr. Sydney 
 
 Brooks. By <*A Diplomat." Vol. 169. 1899. 
 
 pp. 362-374. 
 A Transvaal View of the South African Question. By Dr. 
 
 F. V. Engelenburg. Vol. 169. 1899. pp. 471-487. 
 Historical Causes of the War. By the Right Hon. James 
 
 Bryce, M.P. Vol. 169. 1899. pp. 737-759. 
 
 The National Revieiv. 
 
 The Native Problem in South Africa. By William F. 
 
 Bailey. Vol. 28. 1896. pp. 543-553. 
 The Case for the Transvaal. By F. Reginald Statham. 
 
 Vol. 29. 1897. pp. 325-351- 
 
 The Fortnightly Review. 
 
 Our Boer Policy. By G. B. Clark. Vol. 40 (old 
 series). 1883. pp. 278-289. 
 
 Boer, Africander, and Briton in the Transvaal. By Major 
 F. J. Ricarde-Seaver. Part I. The Past and Pres- 
 ent. Vol. 64. 1895. pp. 197-209. Part II. The 
 Future. Vol.65. 1896. pp. 111-121. 
 
 140 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 The Plain Truth about Mr. Rhodes and the Transvaal. By 
 
 "Imperialist." Vol.65. 1896. pp. 839-856. 
 The "New Situation*' in South Africa. By ** Diplomati- 
 
 cus." Vol. 72. 1899. pp. 160-171. 
 British and Dutch in South Africa. By H. A. Bryden. 
 
 Vol. 72. 1899. pp. 187-196. 
 The Struggle for South African Supremacy. By " Diplo- 
 
 MATicus." Vol. 72. 1899. pp. 335-347. 
 Mr. Chamberlain's Mistakes. By " Diplomaticus." Vol. 
 
 72. 1899. pp. 705-716. 
 A South African Settlement. Anonymous. Vol. 72. 
 
 1899. pp. 721-733- 
 Some Notes on the Transvaal Question. By J. Percy Fitz- 
 
 Patrick. Vol. 72. 1899. pp. 1026-103 1. 
 
 The Edinburgh Rcvieiv. 
 
 Great Britain in South Africa. Anonymous. Vol. 183. 
 1896. pp. 273-305. 
 
 BlackivooiTs Magazine. 
 
 England's Duty in South Africa. By A. Michie. Vol. 
 160. 1896. pp. 265-296. 
 
 The Cosmopolitan. 
 
 Empire Building in South Africa. By Albert Shaw. Vol. 
 20. 1895-96. pp. 472-480. 
 
 ^\ B « A ^^ 
 
 or TM« 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 141 
 
O) 
 
LIBRARY Of THE UNIVERSITY OF CUIFORdU 
 
 (1=1; 
 
 ^yiSQ\/-^ii 
 

 o> 
 
 "f cnnuHH 
 
 >'A 04269 
 
 
 Mk^'^^M U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARI 
 
 iiniiiiiiiiiii 
 
 CDDbQ773b7 
 
 "^"■^'^^ OF CMFOBKIA LIBBARr OF T 
 
 HE «NI^£BSin