Boer Politics | Page 2

Impossible Comparisons.--2. Policy of Re-action.--3. The Bloemfontein Conference 80
CHAPTER XIV.
THE FRANCHISE AFTER THE CONFERENCE OF BLOEMFONTEIN.
1. A Kr��ger Trick.--2. The Bill passed by the Volksraad--3. Pretended Concessions.--4. The Joint Commission.--5. Bargaining.--6. The Conditions, and Withdrawal of Proposals.--7. The Franchise is Self-Government 87
CHAPTER XV.
THE SUZERAINTY OF ENGLAND AND THE SOUTH AFRICAN REPUBLIC.
1. Who Raised the Question of Suzerainty?--2. The Suzerainty and the Conference of the Hague 95
CHAPTER XVI.
THE ARBITRATION QUESTION.
1. How the Transvaal interprets Arbitration.--2. Mr. Chamberlain's Conditions 101
CHAPTER XVII.
THE BOER ULTIMATUM.
1. Dr. Kuyper's Logic.--2. Despatches of 8th and 22nd September.--3. The Ultimatum 108
CHAPTER XVIII.
DR. KUYPER'S FINAL METAPHOR.
1. Where are the Peace Lovers?--2. Moral Worth of the Boers.--3. A Lioness Out of Place.--4. Moral Unity by Means of Unity of Method 113
APPENDIX.
a.--ENGLAND, HOLLAND AND GERMANY 119
b.--DR. KUYPER'S ADMISSION
1. Offer to Dr. Kuyper to Reproduce his Article.--2. Dilatory Reply of Dr. Kuyper.--3. Withdrawal of Dr. Kuyper.--4. Mr. Bruneti��re's Refusal.--5. The Queen of Holland and Dr. Kuyper's Article 124
c.--THE LAST PRO-BOER MANIFESTATION 130
d.--SOUTH AFRICAN CRITICS 136
e.--THE TRANSVAAL AND THE PEACE CONFERENCE HELD IN PARIS FROM SEPTEMBER 30TH TO OCTOBER 5TH, 1900 151

PREFACE.
THE QUESTION.
I have endeavoured in the following pages to separate the Transvaal question from the many side issues by which it is obscured.
In the "Affaire Dreyfus" I constantly recurred to the main point--Dreyfus was condemned upon the "bordereau"; Dreyfus was not the author of the "bordereau," therefore he was not responsible for the documents named in the "bordereau."
In this case, in like manner, there is but one question:--Has or has not the government of the South African Republic acted up to the convention of 1884, and is the English government bound to regard that convention as of no effect with regard to the Uitlanders who have established themselves in the Transvaal on the faith that England would insist upon its being respected?
Pro-Boer Argument.
Pro-Boers refuse to recognise this point, as did M. Cavaignac when, in his speech of July 7th, 1898, he abandoned the "bordereau" to substitute for it the Henry forgery.
They keep talking of the Great Trek of 1836; of England's greed; of the gold mines; and, above all, of the Jameson raid. The Jameson raid is their pet grievance; it takes the place of all argument. The Uitlanders may well say that "Jameson has been Kr��ger's best friend."
Notwithstanding, the Jameson raid is the best proof of the powerlessness of England to protect the interests of her subjects against the pretentions of the Pretoria Government.
In 1894, Lord Ripon had already made ineffectual representations to that Government concerning the contempt with which it was treating the Convention of 1884.
The Uitlanders had approached the Volksraad in a petition signed by 14,800 persons. The petitioners did not ask that the Republic should be placed under the control of the British Government; on the contrary, they postulated the maintenance of its independence; all that they asked was for "equitable administration and fair representation." This petition was received with angry contempt. "Protest, protest as much as you like," said Mr. Kr��ger, "I have arms, and you have none."
It is contended that if President Kr��ger did provide himself to a formidable extent with munitions of war, it was not until after the Jameson Raid.
Here the connexion between cause and effect is not very clear; Jameson once beaten there was no further cause to arm against him. But from the Uitlanders' petition, to which allusion has been made, it is evident that armaments had begun before. Among the alleged grievances we find the following:--
"A policy of force is openly declared against us; ��250,000 have been expended on the construction of forts; upon one alone, designed to terrorise the inhabitants of Johannesburg, ��100,000 has been spent. Large orders have been given to Krupp for big guns and maxims; and it is said that German Officers are coming to drill the burghers."
The Uitlanders of Johannesburg treated with contumely, adopted the theories made use of by the Boers in their Petition of Rights of February 17th, 1881, by which they justified their insurrection against British rule, of December, 1880.
"Then the cause was unexpectedly helped on by the courageous resistance of O. Bezuidenhout against the seizure of his household effects for non-payment of taxes. Here was a breach of the law easy to lay hold of; here was a crime indeed! It was illegal, undoubtedly, but illegal in the same sense as was the refusal of Hampden to pay the four or five shillings "ship money"; the taking of den Briel by the Watergeuzen (Waterbeggars) in 1572; as was the throwing overboard of a cargo of tea in Boston; as was the plot in Cape Colony against the importation of convicts. All these acts were illegal, but of such are the illegalities in which a people takes refuge, when a Government fails in its duty to a law higher than that of man."
In