THE CAUSE OF QUARREL

Gold had been known to exist in the Transvaal before, but it was only in 1886 that it was realised that the deposits which lie some thirty miles south of the capital are of a very extraordinary and valuable nature.  The proportion of gold in the quartz is not particularly high, nor are the veins of a remarkable thickness, but the peculiarity of the Rand mines lies in the fact that throughout this ‘banket’ formation the metal is so uniformly distributed that the enterprise can claim a certainty which is not usually associated with the industry.  It is quarrying rather than mining.  Add to this that the reefs which were originally worked as outcrops have now been traced to enormous depths, and present the same features as those at the surface.  A conservative estimate of the value of the gold has placed it at seven hundred millions of pounds.

Such a discovery produced the inevitable effect.  A great number of adventurers flocked into the country, some desirable and some very much the reverse.  There were circumstances, however, which kept away the rowdy and desperado element who usually make for a newly-opened goldfield.  It was not a class of mining which encouraged the individual adventurer.  It was a field for elaborate machinery, which could only be provided by capital.  Managers, engineers, miners, technical experts, and the tradesmen and middlemen who live upon them, these were the Uitlanders, drawn from all races under the sun, but with the Anglo-Celtic vastly predominant.  The best engineers were American, the best miners were Cornish, the best managers were English, the money to run the mines was largely subscribed in England.  As time went on, however, the German and French interests became more extensive, until their joint holdings are now probably as heavy as those of the British.  Soon the population of the mining centres became about as numerous as that of the whole Boer community, and consisted mainly of men in the prime of life ­men, too, of exceptional intelligence and energy.

The situation was an extraordinary one.  I have already attempted to bring the problem home to an American by suggesting that the Dutch of New York had trekked west and founded an anti-American and highly unprogressive State.  To carry out the analogy we will now suppose that that State was California, that the gold of that State attracted a large inrush of American citizens, that these citizens were heavily taxed and badly used, and that they deafened Washington with their outcry about their injuries.  That would be a fair parallel to the relations between the Transvaal, the Uitlanders, and the British Government.

That these Uitlanders had very real and pressing grievances no one could possibly deny.  To recount them all would be a formidable task, for their whole lives were darkened by injustice.  There was not a wrong which had driven the Boer from Cape Colony which he did not now practise himself upon others ­and a wrong may be excusable in 1835 which is monstrous in 1895.  The primitive virtue which had characterised the farmers broke down in the face of temptation.  The country Boers were little affected, some of them not at all, but the Pretoria Government became a most corrupt oligarchy, venal and incompetent to the last degree.  Officials and imported Hollanders handled the stream of gold which came in from the mines, while the unfortunate Uitlander who paid nine-tenths of the taxation was fleeced at every turn, and met with laughter and taunts when he endeavoured to win the franchise by which he might peaceably set right the wrongs from which he suffered.  He was not an unreasonable person.  On the contrary, he was patient to the verge of meekness, as capital is likely to be when it is surrounded by rifles.  But his situation was intolerable, and after successive attempts at peaceful agitation, and numerous humble petitions to the Volksraad, he began at last to realise that he would never obtain redress unless he could find some way of winning it for himself.

Without attempting to enumerate all the wrongs which embittered the Uitlanders, the more serious of them may be summed up in this way: 

1.  That they were heavily taxed and provided about seven-eighths of the revenue of the country.  The revenue of the South African Republic ­which had been 154,000_l._ in 1886, when the goldfields were opened ­had grown in 1899 to four million pounds, and the country through the industry of the new-comers had changed from one of the poorest to the richest in the whole world (per head of population).

2.  That in spite of this prosperity which they had brought, they were left without a vote, and could by no means influence the disposal of the great sums which they were providing.  Such a case of taxation without representation has never been known.

3.  That they had no voice in the choice or payment of officials.  Men of the worst private character might be placed with complete authority over valuable interests.  The total official salaries had risen in 1899 to a sum sufficient to pay 40_l._ per head to the entire male Boer population.

4.  That they had no control over education.  Mr. John Robinson, the Director-General of the Johannesburg Educational Council, has reckoned the sum spent on the Uitlander schools as 650_l._ out of 63,000_l._ allotted for education, making 1_s._ 10_d._ per head per annum on Uitlander children, and 8_l._ 6_s._ per head on Boer children ­the Uitlander, as always, paying seven-eighths of the original sum.

5.  No power of municipal government.  Watercarts instead of pipes, filthy buckets instead of drains, a corrupt and violent police, a high death-rate in what should be a health resort ­all this in a city which they had built themselves.

6.  Despotic government in the matter of the Press and of the right of public meeting.

7.  Disability from service upon a jury.

8.  Continual harassing of the mining interest by vexatious legislation.  Under this head come many grievances, some special to the mines and some affecting all Uitlanders.  The dynamite monopoly, by which the miners had to pay 600,000_l._ extra per annum in order to get a worse quality of dynamite; the liquor laws, by which the Kaffirs were allowed to be habitually drunk; the incompetence and extortions of the State-owned railway; the granting of concessions for numerous articles of ordinary consumption to individuals, by which high prices were maintained; the surrounding of Johannesburg by tolls from which the town had no profit ­these were among the economical grievances, some large, some petty, which ramified through every transaction of life.  These are the wrongs which Mr. W. T. Stead has described as ’the twopenny-halfpenny grievances of a handful of Englishmen.’

The manner in which the blood was sucked from the Uitlanders, and the rapid spread of wealth among the Boer officials, may be gathered from the list of the salaries of the State servants from the opening of the mines to the outbreak of the war: 

which shows, as Mr. FitzPatrick has pointed out, that the salary list had become twenty-four times what it was when the Uitlanders arrived, and five times as much as the total revenue was then.

But outside and beyond all the definite wrongs from which they suffered, there was a constant irritation to freeborn and progressive men, accustomed to liberal institutions, that they should be despotically ruled by a body of men some of whom were ignorant bigots, some of them buffoons, and nearly all of them openly and shamelessly corrupt.  Out of twenty-five members of the First Volksraad twenty-one were, in the case of the Selati Railway Company, publicly and circumstantially accused of bribery, with full details of the bribes received, their date, and who paid them.  The black-list includes the present vice-president, Schalk Burger; the vice-president of that date; Eloff, the son-in-law of Kruger; and the secretary of the Volksraad.  Apparently every man of the executive and the legislature had his price.

A corrupt assembly is an evil master, but when it is narrow-minded and bigoted as well, it becomes indeed intolerable.  The following tit-bits from the debates in the two Raads show the intelligence and spirit of the men who were ruling over one of the most progressive communities in the world: 

’Pillar-boxes in Pretoria were opposed on the grounds that they were extravagant and effeminate.  Deputy Taljaard said that he could not see why people wanted to be always writing letters; he wrote none himself.  In the days of his youth he had written a letter and had not been afraid to travel fifty miles and more on horseback and by wagon to post it ­and now people complained if they had to go one mile.’

A debate on the possibility of decreasing the plague of locusts led to the following enlightened discussion: 

’July 21. ­Mr. Roos said locusts were a plague, as in the days of King Pharaoh, sent by God, and the country would assuredly be loaded with shame and obloquy if it tried to raise its hand against the mighty hand of the Almighty.

’Messrs. Declerq and Steenkamp spoke in the same strain, quoting largely from the Scriptures.

’The Chairman related a true story of a man whose farm was always spared by the locusts, until one day he caused some to be killed.  His farm was then devastated.

’Mr. Stoop conjured the members not to constitute themselves terrestrial gods and oppose the Almighty.

’Mr. Lucas Meyer raised a storm by ridiculing the arguments of the former speakers, and comparing the locusts to beasts of prey which they destroyed.

’Mr. Labuschagne was violent.  He said the locusts were quite different from beasts of prey.  They were a special plague sent by God for their sinfulness.’

In a further debate: 

’Mr. Jan de Beer complained of the lack of uniformity in neckties.  Some wore a Tom Thumb variety, and others wore scarves.  This was a state of things to be deplored, and he considered that the Raad should put its foot down and define the size and shape of neckties.’

The following note of a debate gives some idea of how far the legislators were qualified to deal with commercial questions: 

’May 8. ­On the application of the Sheba G. M. Co. for permission to erect an aerial tram from the mine to the mill,

’Mr. Grobelaar asked whether an aerial tram was a balloon or whether it could fly through the air.

’The only objection that the Chairman had to urge against granting the tram was that the Company had an English name, and that with so many Dutch ones available.

’Mr. Taljaard objected to the word “participeeren” (participate) as not being Dutch, and to him unintelligible:  “I can’t believe the word is Dutch; why have I never come across it in the Bible if it is?”

’June 18. ­On the application for a concession to treat tailings,

’Mr. Taljaard wished to know if the words “pyrites” and “concentrates” could not be translated into the Dutch language.  He could not understand what it meant.  He had gone to night-school as long as he had been in Pretoria, and even now he could not explain everything to his burghers.  He thought it a shame that big hills should be made on ground under which there might be rich reefs, and which in future might be required for a market or outspan.  He would support the recommendation on condition that the name of the quartz should be translated into Dutch, as there might be more in this than some of them imagined.’

Such debates as these may be amusing at a distance, but they are less entertaining when they come from an autocrat who has complete power over the conditions of your life.

From the fact that they were a community extremely preoccupied by their own business, it followed that the Uitlanders were not ardent politicians, and that they desired to have a share in the government of the State for the purpose of making the conditions of their own industry and of their own daily lives more endurable.  How far there was need of such an interference may be judged by any fair-minded man who reads the list of their complaints.  A superficial view may recognise the Boers as the champions of liberty, but a deeper insight must see that they (as represented by their elected rulers) have in truth stood for all that history has shown to be odious in the form of exclusiveness and oppression.  Their conception of liberty has been a narrow and selfish one, and they have consistently inflicted upon others far heavier wrongs than those against which they had themselves rebelled.

As the mines increased in importance and the miners in numbers, it was found that these political disabilities affected some of that cosmopolitan crowd far more than others, in proportion to the amount of freedom to which their home institutions had made them accustomed.  The Continental Uitlanders were more patient of that which was unendurable to the American and the Briton.  The Americans, however, were in so great a minority that it was upon the British that the brunt of the struggle for freedom fell.  Apart from the fact that the British were more numerous than all the other Uitlanders combined, there were special reasons why they should feel their humiliating position more than the members of any other race.  In the first place, many of the British were British South Africans, who knew that in the neighbouring countries which gave them birth the most liberal possible institutions had been given to the kinsmen of these very Boers who were refusing them the management of their own drains and water-supply.  And again, every Briton knew that Great Britain claimed to be the paramount Power in South Africa, and so he felt as if his own land, to which he might have looked for protection, was conniving at and acquiescing in his ill-treatment.  As citizens of the paramount Power, it was peculiarly galling that they should be held in political subjection.  The British, therefore, were the most persistent and energetic of the agitators.

But it is a poor cause which cannot bear to fairly state and honestly consider the case of its opponents.  The Boers had made, as has been briefly shown, great efforts to establish a country of their own.  They had travelled far, worked hard, and fought bravely.  After all their efforts they were fated to see an influx of strangers into their country, some of them men of questionable character, who threatened to outnumber the original inhabitants.  If the franchise were granted to these, there could be no doubt that, though at first the Boers might control a majority of the votes, it was only a question of time before the new-comers would dominate the Raad and elect their own President, who might adopt a policy abhorrent to the original owners of the land.  Were the Boers to lose by the ballot-box the victory which they had won by their rifles?  Was it fair to expect it?  These new-comers came for gold.  They got their gold.  Their companies paid a hundred per cent.  Was not that enough to satisfy them?  If they did not like the country, why did they not leave it?  No one compelled them to stay there.  But if they stayed, let them be thankful that they were tolerated at all, and not presume to interfere with the laws of those by whose courtesy they were allowed to enter the country.

That is a fair statement of the Boer position, and at first sight an impartial man might say that there was a good deal to say for it; but a closer examination would show that, though it might be tenable in theory, it is unjust and impossible in practice.

In the present crowded state of the world a policy of Thibet may be carried out in some obscure corner, but it cannot be done in a great tract of country which lies right across the main line of industrial progress.  The position is too absolutely artificial.  A handful of people by the right of conquest take possession of an enormous country over which they are dotted at such intervals that it is their boast that one farmhouse cannot see the smoke of another, and yet, though their numbers are so disproportionate to the area which they cover, they refuse to admit any other people upon equal terms, but claim to be a privileged class who shall dominate the new-comers completely.  They are outnumbered in their own land by immigrants who are far more highly educated and progressive, and yet they hold them down in a way which exists nowhere else upon earth.  What is their right?  The right of conquest.  Then the same right may be justly invoked to reverse so intolerable a situation.  This they would themselves acknowledge.  ‘Come on and fight!  Come on!’ cried a member of the Volksraad when the franchise petition of the Uitlanders was presented.  ’Protest!  Protest!  What is the good of protesting?’ said Kruger to Mr. W. Y. Campbell; ’you have not got the guns, I have.’  There was always the final court of appeal.  Judge Creusot and Judge Mauser were always behind the President.

Again, the argument of the Boers would be more valid had they received no benefit from these immigrants.  If they had ignored them they might fairly have stated that they did not desire their presence.  But even while they protested they grew rich at the Uitlanders’ expense.  They could not have it both ways.  It would be consistent to discourage him and not profit by him, or to make him comfortable and build the State upon his money; but to ill-treat him and at the same time grow strong by his taxation must surely be an injustice.

And again, the whole argument is based upon the narrow racial supposition that every naturalised citizen not of Boer extraction must necessarily be unpatriotic.  This is not borne out by the examples of history.  The new-comer soon becomes as proud of his country and as jealous of her liberty as the old.  Had President Kruger given the franchise generously to the Uitlander, his pyramid would have been firm upon its base and not balanced upon its apex.  It is true that the corrupt oligarchy would have vanished, and the spirit of a broader, more tolerant freedom influenced the counsels of the State.  But the republic would have become stronger and more permanent with a population who, if they differed in details, were united in essentials.  Whether such a solution would have been to the advantage of British interests in South Africa is quite another question.  In more ways than one President Kruger has been a good friend to the Empire.

At the time of the Convention of Pretoria (1881) the rights of burghership might be obtained by one year’s residence.  In 1882 it was raised to five years, the reasonable limit which obtains both in Great Britain and in the United States.  Had it remained so, it is safe to say that there would never have been either an Uitlander question or a war.  Grievances would have been righted from the inside without external interference.

In 1890 the inrush of outsiders alarmed the Boers, and the franchise was raised so as to be only attainable by those who had lived fourteen years in the country.  The Uitlanders, who were increasing rapidly in numbers and were suffering from the formidable list of grievances already enumerated, perceived that their wrongs were so numerous that it was hopeless to have them set right seriatim, and that only by obtaining the leverage of the franchise could they hope to move the heavy burden which weighed them down.  In 1893 a petition of 13,000 Uitlanders, couched in most respectful terms, was submitted to the Raad, but met with contemptuous neglect.  Undeterred, however, by this failure, the National Reform Union, an association which was not one of capitalists, came back to the attack in 1894.  They drew up a petition which was signed by 35,000 adult male Uitlanders, as great a number probably as the total Boer male population of the country.  A small liberal body in the Raad supported this memorial and endeavoured in vain to obtain some justice for the new-comers.  Mr. Jeppe was the mouthpiece of this select band.  ‘They own half the soil, they pay at least three-quarters of the taxes,’ said he.  ’They are men who in capital, energy, and education are at least our equals.  What will become of us or our children on that day when we may find ourselves in a minority of one in twenty without a single friend among the other nineteen, among those who will then tell us that they wished to be brothers, but that we by our own act have made them strangers to the republic?’ Such reasonable and liberal sentiments were combated by members who asserted that the signatures could not belong to law-abiding citizens, since they were actually agitating against the law of the franchise, and others whose intolerance was expressed by the defiance of the member already quoted, who challenged the Uitlanders to come out and fight.  The champions of exclusiveness and racial hatred won the day.  The memorial was rejected by sixteen votes to eight, and the franchise law was, on the initiative of the President, actually made more stringent than ever, being framed in such a way that during the fourteen years of probation the applicant should give up his previous nationality, so that for that period he would belong to no country at all.  No hopes were held out that any possible attitude upon the part of the Uitlanders would soften the determination of the President and his burghers.  One who remonstrated was led outside the State buildings by the President, who pointed up at the national flag.  ‘You see that flag?’ said he.  ’If I grant the franchise, I may as well pull it down.’  His animosity against the immigrants was bitter.  ‘Burghers, friends, thieves, murderers, new-comers, and others,’ is the conciliatory opening of one of his public addresses.  Though Johannesburg is only thirty-two miles from Pretoria, and though the State of which he was the head depended for its revenue upon the goldfields, he paid it only three visits in nine years.

This settled animosity was deplorable, but not unnatural.  A man imbued with the idea of a chosen people, and unread in any book save the one which cultivates this very idea, could not be expected to have learned the historical lessons of the advantages which a State reaps from a liberal policy.  To him it was as if the Ammonites and Moabites had demanded admission into the twelve tribes.  He mistook an agitation against the exclusive policy of the State for one against the existence of the State itself.  A wide franchise would have made his republic firm-based and permanent.  It was a minority of the Uitlanders who had any desire to come into the British system.  They were a cosmopolitan crowd, only united by the bond of a common injustice.  The majority of the British immigrants had no desire to subvert the State.  But when every other method had failed, and their petition for the rights of freemen had been flung back at them, it was natural that their eyes should turn to that flag which waved to the north, the west, and the south of them ­the flag which means purity of government with equal rights and equal duties for all men.  Constitutional agitation was laid aside, arms were smuggled in, and everything prepared for an organised rising.

It had been arranged that the town was to rise upon a certain night, that Pretoria should be attacked, the fort seized, and the rifles and ammunition, used to arm the Uitlanders.  It was a feasible device, though it must seem to us, who have had such an experience of the military virtues of the burghers, a very desperate one.  But it is conceivable that the rebels might have held Johannesburg until the universal sympathy which their cause excited throughout South Africa would have caused Great Britain to intervene.  Unfortunately they had complicated matters by asking for outside help.  Mr. Cecil Rhodes was Premier of the Cape, a man of immense energy, and one who had rendered great services to the empire.  The motives of his action are obscure ­certainly, we may say that they were not sordid, for he has always been a man whose thoughts were large and whose habits were simple.  But whatever they may have been ­whether an ill-regulated desire to consolidate South Africa under British rule, or a burning sympathy with the Uitlanders in their fight against injustice ­it is certain that he allowed his lieutenant, Dr. Jameson, to assemble the mounted police of the Chartered Company, of which Rhodes was founder and director, for the purpose of co-operating with the rebels at Johannesburg.  Moreover, when the revolt at Johannesburg was postponed, on account of a disagreement as to which flag they were to rise under, it appears that Jameson (with or without the orders of Rhodes) forced the hand of the conspirators by invading the country with a force absurdly inadequate to the work which he had taken in hand.  Five hundred policemen and two field-guns made up the forlorn hope who started from near Mafeking and crossed the Transvaal border upon December 29, 1895.  On January 2 they were surrounded by the Boers amid the broken country near Dornkop, and after losing many of their number killed and wounded, without food and with spent horses, they were compelled to lay down their arms.  Six burghers lost their lives in the skirmish.

Determined attempts have been made to connect the British Government with this fiasco, and to pretend that the Colonial Secretary and other statesmen were cognisant of it.  Such an impression has been fostered by the apparent reluctance of the Commission of Inquiry to push their researches to the uttermost.  It is much to be regretted that every possible telegram and letter should not have been called for upon that occasion; but the idea that this was not done for fear that Mr. Chamberlain and the British Government would be implicated, becomes absurd in the presence of the fact that the Commission included among its members Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman and Sir William Harcourt.  Is it conceivable that these gentlemen held their hands for fear of damaging the Government, or that Mr. Chamberlain could afterwards have the effrontery to publicly and solemnly deny all knowledge of the business in the presence of gentlemen who had connived at the suppression of the proofs that he did know?  Such a supposition is ridiculous, and yet it is involved in the theory that the Commission refrained from pushing their examination because they were afraid of showing their country to have been in the wrong.

Again, even the most embittered enemy of Mr. Chamberlain must admit that he is a clear-headed man, a man of resolution, and a man with some sense of proportion as to the means which should be used for an end.  Is such a man, knowing the military record of the burghers, the sort of man to connive at the invasion of their country by 500 policemen and two guns?  Would he be likely, even if he approved of the general aim, to sanction such a harebrained piece of folly?  And, having sanctioned it, would he be so weak of purpose as to take energetic steps, the instant that he heard of the invasion, to undo that which he is supposed himself to have done, and to cause the failure of his own scheme?  Why should he on such a supposition send energetic messages to Johannesburg forbidding the British to co-operate with the raiders?  The whole accusation is so absurd that it is only the mania of party spite or of national hatred which could induce anyone to believe it.

Again, supposing for an instant that the British Government knew anything about the coming raid, what is the first and most obvious thing which they would have done?  Whether Jameson got safely to Johannesburg or not there was evidently a probability of a great race-struggle in South Africa.  Would they not then, on some pretext or another, have increased the strength of the British force in the country, which was so weak that it was powerless to influence the course of events?  It is certain that this is so.  But nothing of the kind was done.

Mr. Chamberlain’s own denial is clear and emphatic: 

’I desire to say in the most explicit manner that I had not then, and that I never had, any knowledge, or until, I think it was the day before the actual raid took place, the slightest suspicion of anything in the nature of a hostile or armed invasion of the Transvaal.’ ­(British South Africa Committee, 1897.  .)

The Earl of Selborne, Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, was no less explicit: 

’Neither then nor at any subsequent period prior to the raid did we know of what is now called “Jameson’s plan,” nor that the revolution at Johannesburg was being largely controlled and financed from Cape Colony and Rhodesia....  Sir Hercules Robinson had no suspicion of what was impending, nor apparently President Kruger, nor Mr. Hofmeyr, nor any public man in South Africa, except those who were preparing the plan.  At any rate the fact remains that from no quarter did the Colonial Office receive any warning.  I submit, therefore, it would have been a most extraordinary thing if any suspicion had occurred to us.’

The finding of the Committee ­a Committee composed of men of all parties, some of whom, as we know, were yearning ’to give Joe a fall’ ­was unanimous in condemning the raid and equally unanimous in exonerating the Government from any knowledge of it.  Their Report said: 

’Your Committee fully accept the statements of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and of the Under-Secretary, and entirely exonerate the officials of the Colonial Office of having been in any sense cognisant of the plans which led up to the incursion of Dr. Jameson’s force into the South African Republic....

’Neither the Secretary of State for the Colonies, nor any of the officials of the Colonial Office received any information which made them, or should have made them, or any of them, aware of the plot during its development.’

And yet to this day it is one of the articles of faith of a few crack-brained fanatics in this country, and of many ill-informed and prejudiced editors upon the Continent, that the British Government was responsible for the raid.

The Uitlanders have been severely criticised for not having sent out a force to help Jameson in his difficulties, but it is impossible to see how they could have acted in any other manner.  They had done all they could to prevent Jameson coming to their relief, and now it was rather unreasonable to suppose that they should relieve their reliever.  Indeed, they had an entirely exaggerated idea of the strength of the force which he was bringing, and received the news of his capture with incredulity.  When it became confirmed they rose, but in a half-hearted fashion which was not due to want of courage, but to the difficulties of their position.  On the one hand the British Government disowned Jameson entirely, and did all it could to discourage the rising; on the other, the President had the raiders in his keeping at Pretoria, and let it be understood that their fate depended upon the behaviour of the Uitlanders.  They were led to believe that Jameson would be shot unless they laid down their arms, though, as a matter of fact, Jameson and his people had surrendered upon a promise of quarter.  So skilfully did Kruger use his hostages that he succeeded, with the help of the British Commissioner, in getting the thousands of excited Johannesburgers to lay down their arms without bloodshed.  Completely out-man[oe]uvred by the astute old President, the leaders of the reform movement used all their influence in the direction of peace, thinking that a general amnesty would follow; but the moment that they and their people were helpless the detectives and armed burghers occupied the town, and sixty of their number were hurried to Pretoria Gaol.

To the raiders themselves the President behaved with generosity.  Perhaps he could not find it in his heart to be harsh to the men who had managed to put him in the right and won for him the sympathy of the world.  His own illiberal and oppressive treatment of the new-comers was forgotten in the face of this illegal inroad of filibusters.  The true issues were so obscured by this intrusion that it has taken years to clear them, and perhaps they will never be wholly cleared.  It was forgotten that it was the bad government of the country which was the real cause of the unfortunate raid.  From then onwards the government might grow worse and worse, but it was always possible to point to the raid as justifying everything.  Were the Uitlanders to have the franchise?  How could they expect it after the raid?  Would Britain object to the enormous importation of arms and obvious preparations for war?  They were only precautions against a second raid.  For years the raid stood in the way, not only of all progress, but of all remonstrance.  Through an action over which they had no control, and which they had done their best to prevent, the British Government was left with a bad case and a weakened moral authority.

The raiders were sent home, where the rank and file were very properly released, and the chief officers were condemned to terms of imprisonment which certainly did not err upon the side of severity.  In the meantime, both President Kruger and his burghers had shown a greater severity to the political prisoners from Johannesburg than to the armed followers of Jameson.  The nationality of these prisoners is interesting and suggestive.  There were twenty-three Englishmen, sixteen South Africans, nine Scotchmen, six Americans, two Welshmen, one Irishman, one Australian, one Hollander, one Bavarian, one Canadian, one Swiss, and one Turk.  The list is sufficient comment upon the assertion that only the British Uitlanders made serious complaints of subjection and injustice.  The prisoners were arrested in January, but the trial did not take place until the end of April.  All were found guilty of high treason.  Mr. Lionel Phillips, Colonel Rhodes (brother of Mr. Cecil Rhodes), George Farrar, and Mr. Hammond, the American engineer, were condemned to death, a sentence which was afterwards commuted to the payment of an enormous fine.  The other prisoners were condemned to two years’ imprisonment, with a fine of 2,000_l._ each.  The imprisonment was of the most arduous and trying sort, and was embittered by the harshness of the gaoler, Du Plessis.  One of the unfortunate men cut his throat, and several fell seriously ill, the diet and the sanitary conditions being equally unhealthy.  At last, at the end of May, all the prisoners but six were released.  Four of the six soon followed, two stalwarts, Sampson and Davies, refusing to sign any petition and remaining in prison until they were set free in 1897.  Altogether the Transvaal Government received in fines from the reform prisoners the enormous sum of 212,000_l._ A certain comic relief was immediately afterwards given to so grave an episode by the presentation of a bill to Great Britain for 1,677,938_l._ 3_s._ 3_d._ ­the greater part of which was under the heading of moral and intellectual damage.  It is to be feared that even the 3_s._ 3_d._ remains still unpaid.

The raid was past and the reform movement was past, but the causes which produced them both remained.  It is hardly conceivable that a statesman who loved his country would have refrained from making some effort to remove a state of things which had already caused such grave dangers, and which must obviously become more serious with every year that passed.  But Paul Kruger had hardened his heart, and was not to be moved.  The grievances of the Uitlanders became heavier than ever.  The one power in the land to which they had been able to appeal for some sort of redress amid their troubles was the law courts.  Now it was decreed that the courts should be dependent on the Volksraad.  The Chief Justice protested against such a degradation of his high office, and he was dismissed in consequence without a pension.  The judge who had condemned the reformers was chosen to fill the vacancy, and the protection of a fixed law was withdrawn from the Uitlanders.

A commission appointed by the State was sent to examine into the condition of the mining industry and the grievances from which the new-comers suffered.  The chairman was Mr. Schalk Burger, one of the most liberal of the Boers, and the proceedings were thorough and impartial.  The result was a report which amply vindicated the reformers, and suggested remedies which would have gone a long way towards satisfying the Uitlanders.  With such enlightened legislation their motives for seeking the franchise would have been less pressing.  But the President and his Raad would have none of the recommendations of the commission.  The rugged old autocrat declared that Schalk Burger was a traitor to his country for having signed such a document, and a new reactionary committee was chosen to report upon the report.  Words and papers were the only outcome of the affair.  No amelioration came to the new-comers.  But at least they had again put their case publicly upon record, and it had been endorsed by the most respected of the burghers.  Gradually in the press of the English-speaking countries the raid was ceasing to obscure the issue.  More and more clearly it was coming out that no permanent settlement was possible where half the population was oppressed by the other half.  They had tried peaceful means and failed.  They had tried warlike means and failed.  What was there left for them to do?  Their own country, the paramount power of South Africa, had never helped them.  Perhaps if it were directly appealed to it might do so.  It could not, if only for the sake of its own imperial prestige, leave its children for ever in a state of subjection.  The small spark which caused a final explosion came from the shooting of a British subject named Edgar by a Boer policeman, Jones, in Johannesburg.  The action of the policeman was upheld by the authorities, and the British felt that their lives were no longer safe in the presence of an armed overbearing police.  At another time the incident might have been of no great importance, but at that moment it seemed to be taken as the crowning example of the injustice under which the miners suffered.  A meeting of protest called by the British residents was broken up by gangs of workmen under Boer officials.  Driven to desperation the Uitlanders determined upon a petition to Queen Victoria, and in doing so they brought their grievances out of the limits of a local controversy into the broader field of international politics.  Great Britain must either protect them or acknowledge that their protection was beyond her power.  A direct petition to the Queen praying for protection was signed in April 1899 by 21,000 Uitlanders.

The lines which this historical petition took may be judged from the following excerpt: 

’The condition of Your Majesty’s subjects in this State has indeed become well-nigh intolerable.

’The acknowledged and admitted grievances of which Your Majesty’s subjects complained prior to 1895, not only are not redressed, but exist to-day in an aggravated form.  They are still deprived of all political rights, they are denied any voice in the government of the country, they are taxed far above the requirements of the country, the revenue of which is misapplied and devoted to objects which keep alive a continuous and well-founded feeling of irritation, without in any way advancing the general interest of the State.  Maladministration and peculation of public moneys go hand-in-hand, without any vigorous measures being adopted to put a stop to the scandal.  The education of Uitlander children is made subject to impossible conditions.  The police afford no adequate protection to the lives and property of the inhabitants of Johannesburg; they are rather a source of danger to the peace and safety of the Uitlander population.

’A further grievance has become prominent since the beginning of the year.  The power vested in the Government by means of the Public Meetings Act has been a menace to Your Majesty’s subjects since the enactment of the Act in 1894.  This power has now been applied in order to deliver a blow that strikes at the inherent and inalienable birthright of every British subject ­namely, his right to petition his Sovereign.  Straining to the utmost the language and intention of the law, the Government have arrested two British subjects who assisted in presenting a petition to Your Majesty on behalf of four thousand fellow-subjects.  Not content with this, the Government, when Your Majesty’s loyal subjects again attempted to lay their grievances before Your Majesty, permitted their meeting to be broken up, and the objects of it to be defeated, by a body of Boers, organised by Government officials and acting under the protection of the police.  By reason, therefore, of the direct, as well as the indirect, act of the Government, Your Majesty’s loyal subjects have been prevented from publicly ventilating their grievances, and from laying them before Your Majesty.

’Wherefore Your Majesty’s humble petitioners humbly beseech Your Most Gracious Majesty to extend Your Majesty’s protection to Your Majesty’s loyal subjects resident in this State, and to cause an inquiry to be made into grievances and complaints enumerated and set forth in this humble petition, and to direct Your Majesty’s representative in South Africa to take measures which will insure the speedy reform of the abuses complained of, and to obtain substantial guarantees from the Government of this State for a recognition of their rights as British subjects.’

From the date of this direct petition from our ill-used people to their Sovereign events moved inevitably towards one end.  Sometimes the surface was troubled and sometimes smooth, but the stream always ran swiftly and the roar of the fall sounded ever louder in the ears.