LIFE IN GAOL.
In the Transvaal no distinction is made between ordinary criminals
and those who in other countries are recognized as first-class
misdemeanants. Consequently the Reformers, without regard to the
nature of their offence, their habits, health, age, or condition,
were handed over to the gaoler, Du Plessis, a relative of President
Kruger, to be dealt with at his kind discretion. For two days the
prisoners existed on the ordinary prison fare. The majority being men
in the early prime of life and in excellent health, suffered no ill
effects, preferring to do with little or no food rather than touch
that which was doled out to them; but to the others it was a rather
serious thing. There were several men between fifty and sixty years
of age whose lives had been spent under favourable conditions. There
were some suffering from consumption, one from diabetes, one from
fever, one from dysentery, and several others from less dangerous but
sufficiently serious complaints. All alike were compelled to sleep
upon the floor, with two thin blankets for protection. They were
locked in at 6 p.m., and allowed out at 6 a.m. Sanitary accommodation
was represented by the presence of a couple of buckets in the
sleeping room. The air-space per man worked out at 145 cubic feet as
against 900 feet prescribed by English prison regulations.
Ventilation was afforded on the one side by square holes cut in the
corrugated iron walls of the shed,{35} and on the other (the
buildings being lean-to's against the permanent prison buildings)
by grated windows opening into the native cells. Needless to say,
these grated windows were originally intended to afford ventilation
to the native cells, but the buildings to accommodate the Reformers
had been erected against the side-walls of the Kaffir quarters. The
stench was indescribable. At 6 a.m. the prisoners were allowed out
into the yard, where they had the option of exercising throughout the
day. The lavatories and bathing arrangements consisted of a tap in
the yard and an open furrow through which the town water ran, the
lower end of which was used as a wash-place by prisoners, white and
black alike. Within a foot or two of the furrow where alone washing
of the person or of clothing was allowed stood the gaol urinals.
There was neither adequate provision in this department nor any
attempt at proper supervision, the result being that through
irregularities, neglect, and defective arrangement the ground on both
sides of the water-furrow for six or eight yards was horribly stained
and saturated by leakage. Many of the prisoners could not approach
this quarter without being physically ill. Without further detail it
may be stated that there were at that time over 250 prisoners, about
100 of whom were white. There were three closets and six buckets for
the accommodation of all, and removals took place sometimes once a
day, sometimes once in every four days. Nothing but the horror of
such conditions, and the fact that they prevail still in Pretoria
Gaol, and presumably in other gaols more removed from critical
supervision, could warrant allusions to such a disgusting state of
affairs.
At 6.15 breakfast was served. A number of tin dishes, containing one
pound of mealie-meal porridge (ground maize) each were placed in a
row on the ground in the yard in the same manner as a dog's food
might be set out. A bucket near by contained some coarse salt in the
condition in which it was collected in the natural salt pans, the
cubes varying from the size of peas to the size of acorns. No sugar,
milk, tea, or coffee, was allowed. In order to utilize the salt the
prisoners were obliged to crush it with rough stones on the cement
steps. Needless to say, but few partook of this food. To those who
had not tasted it before in the course of prospecting or up-country
travelling where conditions are sometimes very hard, it was no
more possible to swallow it than to eat sawdust.
Dinner was at twelve o'clock, and it consisted of coarse meat boiled
to that degree which was calculated to qualify the water in which it
was boiled to be called soup, without depriving the meat of all title
to be considered a separate dish. With this meal was also served half
a pound of bread. Supper, which was provided at five o'clock, was
exactly the same as breakfast.
Two days of this fare told very severely upon those whose physical
condition was not of the best. By the third day several of the older
men and those in ill-health had broken down and were placed on
hospital fare. Matters were sufficiently serious to induce the
authorities to allow gradual amelioration of the conditions, and by
degrees food of a better class was introduced. Mattresses and other
articles of bedding were allowed, but stretchers although provided
for in the prison regulations were denied to the men until a few
hours before their release a month later, when the prisoners were
permitted by the gaoler to purchase them, no doubt with an eye to
reversion to him in the course of a few hours. From time to time the
regulations as to food were varied at the whim of the gaoler. On one
day only cooked food would be allowed in; on another only raw food;
on a third nothing but tinned stuff; on a fourth all was turned back
at the gates with the exception of that obtained by a few individuals
at a heavy premium.
A day or two after the passing of sentence representations were made
to the prisoners, excluding the four death-sentence men, that it
would be advisable to appeal to the clemency of the Government for
some mitigation. In that case, it was stated, there was every reason
to believe that the sentence of imprisonment would be entirely
remitted and that the sentence of banishment would also be commuted.
The individuals from whom this suggestion first came were of the
class which habitually trades between the Government and the
public--the gentlemen of the backstairs. For this reason some of the
prisoners gave considerable credence to the reports, whilst others
for the very same reason would have nothing whatever to do with them.
Hence arose a condition of things very like a deadlock among the
prisoners themselves. It was represented by these agents that it
would be worse than useless for some of the prisoners to petition if
many others refused to do so and stood out. Some of the prisoners did
actually petition--a course of action which was strongly condemned by
others; but it should be borne in mind that there were among the
prisoners many men who were in bad health and poor circumstances, who
had heavy responsibilities in private life, and who were not only
unable to pay their fines, but even unable to make any provision for
their families during incarceration. Such conditions would tend to
shake the nerve of most men.
With this nucleus to work upon the Government through their agents
began a system of terrorism by which they hoped to establish
conditions under which their 'magnanimity by inches' would appear in
the most favourable possible light. The first petition presented for
the signature of the prisoners was one in which they were asked to
admit the justice of their sentences, to express regret for what they
had done and to promise to behave themselves in the future. The
document closed with an obsequious and humiliating appeal to the
'proved magnanimity of the Government.' The reception accorded to
this was distinctly unfavourable, copies of the petitions being in
some instances torn up and flung in the faces of those who presented
them. The great majority of the prisoners refused to have anything to
do with them, and on representing the view that any appeal so couched
was not consistent with their self-respect, they were informed that
the petition had already been shown to the President and members of
the Executive Council and had been approved by them and that it would
not look well to alter it now.
Every effort was made for some days to induce the prisoners to sign
this document, but they refused. A certain number of the men were
opposed to signing anything whatever, even the most formal appeal to
the Executive Council for a revision of sentence. They based their
refusal upon two reasons: 1st, that they had been arrested by an act
of treachery and tried by a packed Court, and if the Executive
recognized the injustice of the sentence they might act
spontaneously without petition from the prisoners; 2nd, that they
believed that any document however moderate which they might sign
would only be the thin end of the wedge by which the Government hoped
to introduce the principle of individual statements and pleas--that
is to say each one to excuse himself at the expense of his neighbour,
and thus enable the authorities to establish by the prisoners' own
confessions the extent of the guilt and complicity which they had
been unable to prove.
Under such conditions an appeal was made to Messrs. Rose Innes, Q.C.,
and Solomon, Q.C. These gentlemen had remained in Pretoria and
devoted their time and energies to obtaining some amelioration of the
conditions of imprisonment and some mitigation of the sentences
imposed upon the Reformers. The petition as presented by the
Government was shown to Mr. Innes, who indignantly rejected the
suggestion of signing any such document. As the strongest reason
adduced in favour of signing petitions was the statement that
according to law and custom it was impossible for the Government to
take cognizance of the prisoners' case even with every desire to
mitigate the punishment unless it was brought before them by direct
appeal, Mr. Innes undertook to see the President and Chief-Justice
Kotzé on the subject. By this time further suggestions had been made
on the subject of petitions, and the prisoners were being urged among
other things to name in plain terms the extent and manner in which
they would like their sentences commuted. This proposal was regarded
as a preposterous and ridiculous one; but nothing is too ridiculous
for Pretoria and it was necessary to deal seriously with it.
In these circumstances, Mr. Rose Innes interviewed the Chief Justice,
in order to get the highest authority in the country as a guide. Mr.
Kotzé would not at first express an opinion as to whether petitions
should be sent in, but he was evidently inclined to recommend them as
politic, 'But,' said Mr. Innes, 'it is not a question of policy; it
is a matter of law. Is there anything in the law which renders it
necessary for a prisoner to petition before his sentence may be
revised by the Executive--anything which debars the Executive from
dealing with his case if he does not petition?' Mr. Kotzé's answer
was clear: 'No, certainly not--nothing whatever!'
In the interview with the President which took place immediately
after this Mr. Innes was brusquely informed that petitions from the
prisoners were of no value, and would receive no consideration; that
the President did not want any of their petitions; and that he was
guided solely by his burghers, who had already petitioned in the
matter. 'I would pay more heed,' said Mr. Kruger, 'to a petition from
fifty of my burghers than to one from the whole of Johannesburg.' At
the conclusion of an unpleasant interview, which called for all the
tact and good temper at the command of the gentleman who was
interesting himself on behalf of the prisoners, the President added
in an offhand manner, 'The petitions can do no harm and might
strengthen my hands in dealing with the rest of the Executive; so
they can send them in if they like.'
With this answer Messrs. Innes and Solomon returned to the gaol, and
after informing the prisoners of what had taken place advised them,
under the circumstances, to make a formal but respectful appeal for a
revision of the sentences. It was their opinion, based upon the
information which they had at great pains gathered, and it was also
the opinion of the Chief Justice, that no petition was necessary, and
that the sentences would be brought under the consideration of the
Executive by the memorials of the burghers; but they considered that
as interested persons or indiscreet friends had already suggested the
idea of petitions, and as a refusal now to sign anything might have a
very unfavourable effect upon persons with the disposition and
character of those with whom they had to deal, it would be advisable
to make an appeal so worded as to formally comply with the
requirements of the extreme party in the Executive; one which would
satisfy those of the prisoners who were in favour of appealing, and
would not be offensive to those who were against petitions at any
cost.
The strongest reason for urging this was to preserve unanimity of
action among the prisoners. The course was in fact a compromise
designed to satisfy those who considered a petition of some sort to
be necessary, and those who would not as they expressed it
'sacrifice their self-respect' by asking for anything from the
people who had treated them in what they deemed to be a dishonest
and treacherous manner.
All the prisoners except Messrs. A. Woolls-Sampson and W.D. (Karri)
Davies agreed to this: many did so much against their own wishes
because of the appeal to stand together, and because it was strongly
urged that their obstinacy would affect not only themselves but would
prevent the liberation of others whose circumstances were almost
desperate. They yielded--it is true--but remained unconvinced. To
Messrs. Sampson and Davies the answers of the Chief Justice and the
President are now of considerable importance, since the reason given
for their detention involves the repudiation of the assurances given
by the President and Chief Justice.
Those who had not signed any other form of appeal now made a formal
application to have their sentences brought into review by the
Executive Council. They stated then their belief that it was only the
beginning of the petition business that it would be wholly
ineffective and that it was to be understood that they would sign no
more under any circumstances. This application was deemed by the
emissaries of the Government to be sufficient to comply with the
requirements, and promises were conveyed to the prisoners that the
sentences would be at once taken into consideration and commutations
announced. In the course of a day or two however further demands were
made, and the prisoners were informed that they would be dressed in
prison garb under severer regulations specially passed for them
unless they at once petitioned against this course.
Again Mr. Innes represented their case to the Government at the
dictate of his own feelings of humanity, and not prompted thereto by
the prisoners themselves, most of whom would have been glad to see
the Government wreak their vengeance in petty and vindictive
provisions. The proposed alterations were however abandoned without
protest from the prisoners after the supply of convict garb had been
sent up to the gaol. So matters went on day by day, each day bringing
its fresh instalment of threats promises and cajoleries, each
morning its batch of disappointments. It was at first difficult to
say what object the Government had in view in endeavouring to compel
the Reformers to sign petitions, unless it were the unworthy one of
desiring to humiliate men who were already down, or the perhaps
more contemptible one of forcing them to turn informers by a process
of self-excusing and thus enable them to differentiate in the
commutations. The fact remained that repeated efforts were made and
pressure brought to bear upon the men to induce them to sign. One
pretext after another was used. Finally the naked truth came out: the
Government required each man to state in an individual declaration
the extent of his guilt the extenuating facts and the circumstances
under which he became associated with the Reform movement. This was
exactly what had been foretold by men who understood Boer methods.
The means resorted to by the gaol officials to enforce this
petition-signing were characteristic. The gaoler (Du Plessis) is one
of the most unfavourable specimens of his race. Unscrupulous and
brutal in his methods, untrustworthy as to his undertakings, and
violent and uncertain in his temper, he singled out those among the
prisoners whom he considered to be the leaders of the 'stiff-necked'
party as he termed it, and treated them with as much severity as he
could. These men found themselves unable to obtain those facilities
which were regarded as the right of all the prisoners. Upon occasion
their food was stopped at the gates, and visitors--their wives and
families--were refused admission, although provided with permits from
the proper authorities and complying with the gaol regulations; and
on more than one occasion he informed individual members of this
party that the 'petitions would have to be signed,' that they would
have to 'go down on their knees to the Government,' otherwise they
would 'rot in gaol.' All this undisguised eagerness to obtain the
signatures naturally only strengthened the resolution of the men who
stood out. They had already against their wishes and judgment signed
one application, and more than that they refused to do. When it was
found to be impossible to induce the men to inform against each
other, some modification was made in the demands of the
petition-hunters and some prisoners were asked and induced to make
statements concerning their own part in the late movement, making no
allusion to the part played by others, and, for reasons which it is
impossible to divine unless it was designed to lead to something
more, this was regarded by the Government as a desirable step.
The suspense and disappointment added to the original sentence upon a
man who was never even mentioned in evidence and who took no part in
the Reform movement, beyond associating himself with the
organizations for the protection of property in Johannesburg, told so
severely upon one of the prisoners that his mind became unhinged, and
in the course of the following period he developed marked signs of
homicidal and suicidal mania. His condition was so serious that
strong representations were made to all the officials connected with
the gaol--the gaoler himself, the district surgeon, the commissioner
of police, and the landdrost of Pretoria. The prisoners themselves
organized a system of guards or watches over their comrade, pending
the result of their representations to the officials. On the fourth
day however the unfortunate man, driven out of his mind by the
constant and cruel disappointment of purposely raised hopes, eluding
the watchfulness of his friends took his own life.
The news of this event was received with horror throughout South
Africa, the more so as for some days previously the newspapers had
hinted at some such impending catastrophe. In the course of the
inquiry which was held evidence was given showing that the gaol
surgeon had reported the state of affairs to the proper authorities
some days before, but in a formal and half-hearted way. Evidence
however was forthcoming that four of the prisoners (themselves
medical men) had forcibly represented the extreme seriousness of the
case to the gaoler, the gaol surgeon and the landdrost of Pretoria,
and had induced the assistant-gaoler and warders to support their
representations, but all without avail. The result of the inquiry was
to lay partial blame upon the doctor and to acquit everybody else--a
result which the public have been used to expect in the Transvaal. It
is somewhat difficult to see how the decision was arrived at, seeing
that in the offices there was the record of a special pass granted
to the unfortunate man's wife to visit him and remain with him for a
considerable period on the previous day in order to cheer him up
and avert serious consequences. The incident told severely upon the
nerves of those who were not themselves in the best of health, and
it was found necessary immediately to release or remove others among
the prisoners for fear of similar results.
The Government seemed to realize that it was incumbent upon them to
do something in order to allay the feeling of indignation which was
being roused throughout South Africa at their manner of treating the
prisoners, so a further instalment of magnanimity was decided upon.
On the day of the unfortunate affair the manager of the Government
newspaper, _The Press_, was authorized by President Kruger and other
members of the Executive to inform the prisoners that they would have
to make modified personal statements of the nature previously
indicated, and if these petitions were presented to the Executive
Council by 8 a.m. on the following Monday (the prisoners would then
have been three weeks in gaol) orders for their release would be
issued by Monday night. In order to secure a favourable reception of
this suggestion it was arranged that the clergyman who was to conduct
Divine service on Sunday in the gaol would deliver this message from
the President to the prisoners at the conclusion of the service, and
urge the men for their own sakes and for the sake of their families
and of their friends to abandon the position which they had taken up
and to sign declarations of the nature required, and so secure their
release. Nor was this all. Outside the gaol the wives of those men
who stood out against the petition movement were informed by
Government officials that unless the demands of the Government were
complied with by their husbands they would serve the full period of
their sentence. Pressure was brought to bear upon these ladies and
special facilities were given them to visit the gaol, avowedly in
order to bring about the desired end.
Eleven of the prisoners--apart from the four whose punishment in
substitution for death had not been decided upon, and who were
therefore not concerned in the petitions--declined to reconsider
their decision, and elected rather to serve their term of two years;
and they expressed the conviction at the same time that these
promises of the President would not be kept any more than others
had been. The result justified their judgment. After a postponement
of two days on some flimsy pretext the official intimation of the
commutations was given to the prisoners on Wednesday, May 20. Instead
of the release positively and definitely promised the term of
imprisonment was reduced in the following degree: Ten men were
released, twenty-four men were condemned to three months', eighteen
to five months', and four to one year's imprisonment; and the
clemency of the Government towards the four leaders was indicated by
a sentence of fifteen years each.
Even a short period of imprisonment under the existing conditions
meant certain death to a proportion of the men sentenced, and it is
not to be wondered at that the 'magnanimity' displayed by the
Government after the disappointments and delays seriously affected
the health of a number of the men, following as it did closely upon
the tragic affair already alluded to.
With regard to Messrs. Sampson and Davies no decision was announced,
it being intimated by Dr. Leyds that, as they had made no petition,
their case had not been brought before the Government, and the
Executive had therefore no official knowledge of their existence. But
the extent of the Government's magnanimity was even then not fully
known. On the following day it was announced to the prisoners that
they had been misinformed with regard to the five and twelve months'
commutations--that the intention and resolution of the Executive was
merely to grant these men permission to appeal at the end of the
periods named to the aforesaid magnanimity.
Some prominence has been given to the cases of those prisoners who
were unable for physical or other special reasons to withstand the
strain; and it should therefore be made equally clear that in many
cases the men regarded with contemptuous amusement the cat and mouse
policy and the stage-managed magnanimity displayed towards them. They
were perfectly well able and willing to endure the sentence passed
upon them, and they were not misled by Boer promises in which they
had never had any faith at all. There are good reasons to be assigned
for the willingness of many of the men to make appeals to the
Government: sheer hard necessity and the sufferings of those
dependent upon them were among these reasons; and it is unfair to
consider these appeals to have been due to loss of nerve.
There were among the prisoners twenty-three Englishmen, sixteen South
Africans, nine Scotchmen, six Americans, two Welshmen, one Irishman,
one Australian, one Hollander, one Bavarian, one German, one
Canadian, one Swiss, and one Turk. This variety of nationalities
should receive due consideration when questions such as for instance
that of the flag are considered. In this matter of petitions it was
not to be expected that men whose associations with the country had
been limited to a few years should experience the same depth of
feeling and bitterness of resentment as the South Africans born who
look upon the country as their native land and who view with keen
resentment the attitude of the Boers towards them in the Transvaal,
so much at variance with their attitude towards the Boers in the
neighbouring colonies. Nothing could illustrate this difference in
feeling better than the fact that of the eleven men who throughout
declined to sign petitions eight were South African born, one
Australian, one English, and one Scotch. There is nothing
discreditable to others in these figures; they simply indicate the
difference of feeling which did and indeed naturally must exist. The
South African born men consider themselves to have been robbed of a
portion of their birthright; the others have not the same reason for
thinking this.
With men of so many nationalities the position of the British
Resident would in any case have been one of difficulty, especially
after the part played by the High Commissioner. In the case of Sir
Jacobus de Wet very little satisfaction was given. What caused the
most comment and annoyance among the prisoners was that official
representatives of other countries appeared to have unusual
facilities offered them to visit the subjects of their Government--at
least, they could command the ordinary courtesies--whereas in the
case of the British Agent nothing of this sort existed. Frequently he
was observed standing outside the gaol in the worst of weather
without shelter, patiently waiting until the gaoler would deem fit to
see him. In the meantime that official would stroll through the yard,
making remarks to his subordinates indicative of the satisfaction he
experienced in keeping the representative of Her Majesty outside in
the rain and mud. Upon occasions when he was afforded admission he
was hustled through the yard by a warder and not allowed to hold
private conversation with any of the prisoners. On several occasions
he complained that he was refused admission by order of the gaoler,
and the spectacle of England's representative being turned away by an
ignorant and ill-conditioned official like Du Plessis was not an
edifying one. It is only necessary to say that upon an occasion when
Du Plessis adopted the same tactics towards the Portuguese Consul
that gentleman proceeded at once to the Presidency and demanded as
his right free admission to the gaol whenever he chose to go, and the
right was promptly recognized although there was no subject of his
Government at the time within the precincts. Indeed the Portuguese
Consul stated openly that he called for the purpose of visiting as a
friend one of the Reform prisoners, giving the name of one of the
recalcitrants most objectionable to the Government. The American
Consul too carried matters with a high hand on the occasion of his
visit to Pretoria, and it seemed as though the Paramount Power was
the only one which the Transvaal Government could afford or cared to
treat with contempt.
The period of gaol life afforded the Reformers some opportunity of
studying a department of the Transvaal Administration which they had
not before realized to be so badly in need of reform. The system--if
system it can be called--upon which the gaol was conducted may be
gathered from the gaoler's own words. When one of the prisoners had
inquired of him whether a certain treatment to which a white convict
had been subjected was in accordance with the rules of the gaol and
had received an answer in the affirmative, he remarked that he did
not think many of the Reformers could exist under such conditions. Du
Plessis replied: 'Oh no! Not one of you would be alive a month
if the rules were enforced. No white man could stand them. Indeed,'
he added, 'if the rules were _properly_ enforced, not even a nigger
could stand them!'
Some subsequent experience of gaol-life induced the Reformers to
accept this view as tolerably correct. It is known for instance that
after the Malaboch war sixty-four of the tribe were incarcerated in
Pretoria Gaol. Some twenty were subsequently released, but of the
remainder twenty-six died within the year. Bad food vile sanitary
arrangements and want of clothing and shelter contributed to this
end. Malaboch was a petty chief against whom an expedition was
organized, ostensibly because he had refused to pay his taxes. The
expedition is chiefly notorious on account of the commandeering of
British subjects which led to the visit of Sir Henry Loch already
described. It resulted--as these expeditions inevitably do--in the
worsting of the natives, the capture of the chief and his headmen,
and the parcelling out of his tribe as indentured servants among the
Boers.
Considerable sympathy was felt with Malaboch among the Uitlanders,
not because of his refusal to pay taxes but because the opinion
prevailed that this refusal was due only to the tyrannical and
improper conduct of the Boer native commissioners; and a number of
Johannesburg men resolved in the interests of the native and also of
the native labour supply on the Rand to have the matter cleared up at
the forthcoming trial of the chief. Funds were provided and counsel
employed, nominally to defend Malaboch, but really to impeach the
native commissioners, who in many cases were and continue to be a
perfect curse to the country. No sooner had this intended course of
action become known than the Government decided to treat their
prisoners under the provisions of martial law--to treat them, in
fact, as prisoners of war, who were liable to be indefinitely
detained without further trial. Under these conditions they were
placed in the Pretoria Gaol, and with the exception of a few
subordinates there they have lived--or died--since. The offences of
these natives, for all anyone knows, may have been similar to those
of Langalibalele, Dinizulu, Secocoeni, Cetewayo, and other native
chiefs whom the British Government have also disposed of without
trial. But it is urged that these men are entitled to a trial,
because it is well known that the provocation under which they
committed their offences against the law--if indeed any were
committed--was such as, in the minds of most people, would justify
their action.{36}
The position of a native in the Pretoria Gaol is indeed an unhappy
one. Sleeping accommodation--that is to say, shed accommodation--is
provided for about one-quarter of the number confined there. During
fine weather it is no hardship upon the natives to sleep in the open
yard provided that they have some covering. The blankets doled out to
them are however in many cases such as one would not allow to remain
in one's kennels; and in wet or cold weather (and the fact is that
during at least one quarter of the year the nights are cold, whilst
during the five months' wet season rain may fall at any time) the
sufferings of these unfortunates many of whom have no blankets at all
are very severe. Of course the stronger fight their way into the
shed, and even fill the little covered passage-way; the others crouch
or lie about in the open yard like wild beasts without a vestige of
shelter.
On behalf of the native political prisoners representations were made
by the gaol doctor that they were dying in numbers from scurvy and
fever, for want of vegetable food. A special effort on his part
secured for a few days some allowance of this nature, but the matter
having been brought to the notice of General Joubert, the
Superintendent-General of natives, peremptory orders were issued to
discontinue this; and this although the wretched creatures might have
been sufficiently supplied from the gardens attached to the gaol
which are cultivated by the prisoners, and the product of which was
used by the gaoler to feed his pigs. For a little while longer the
doctor continued the vegetable diet at his own expense, but being
unable to afford this it was discontinued and the former death-rate
was resumed.
Floggings are quite common. In many instances white men have been
flogged there. It is not intended to suggest that this should not
have been done, but cases occurred in the Pretoria Gaol which are
surely difficult to justify. Du Plessis stated to the Reform
prisoners that he had with the sanction of the Landdrost inflicted
upon one prisoner named Thompson, who was undoubtedly refractory and
disobedient, _upwards of eighty lashes within three weeks._ He added
that this was as good as a death-sentence, because neither white nor
black could stand two inflictions of twenty-five lashes, as they were
given in Pretoria Gaol, without permanent injury to the constitution.
The effect, he observed, of this severe punishment upon the back was
to cause the blood to rush and settle on the lungs, and in every case
it resulted in fatal lung mischief.
During the period of imprisonment the Reformers witnessed a
considerable number of floggings. These when inflicted by the
assistant-gaoler or warders were usually marked by some kind of
moderation and consideration for the prisoner's physical condition,
and some regard for official decencies. The same cannot be said of
those in which Du Plessis himself took a prominent part. Upon one
occasion when a native had been released from the triangle, after
twenty strokes from the cat had been borne without a murmur, Du
Plessis suddenly became infuriated at the stoicism of his victim, and
stepping towards him knocked the released man down with his fist and
spurned him with his foot. Upon another occasion a boy of ten or
twelve years of age (under what circumstances is not known) was taken
by Du Plessis into the open yard, stretched in mid air by two warders
gripping his wrists and ankles, and flogged with a cane by Du Plessis
himself. The screams of the child were heart-rending and the sight
caused one lady who happened to be visiting in the gaol to faint.
When the wretched urchin was released by the two warders and stood
cowering before Du Plessis the latter repeated his former performance
of knocking his victim down with his closed fist.
Mr. Du Plessis it should be remembered is a sample of a certain class
only of the Boers--not by any means of all. He is a man with a
treacherous and vindictive temper, distinctly unpleasant in
appearance, being coarsely and powerfully built, and enjoying an
expression of countenance which varies between cunning and
insincerity on one hand and undisguised malevolence on the other.
Some idea of the general kindliness of his disposition may be
gathered from his actions. On one occasion, when special
relaxation of the rules was authorized by the Landdrost of Pretoria
in order to enable a number of the Johannesburg friends of the
prisoners to see them, and when about one hundred permits had been
issued by that official to men travelling over from Johannesburg
specially for the purpose, Du Plessis devised means to defeat this
act of consideration, and issued orders to his guards to admit only
three visitors at a time to the gaol. As a consequence, more than
half failed to gain admittance. Nor was he satisfied with this; he
informed the prisoners themselves that he wished the Landdrost had
issued two hundred passes instead of one hundred, so that he might
let those Johannesburg people know who was 'baas' there. Possibly the
fact that on the previous day he had been severely rebuffed in his
petition campaign may have provoked this act of retaliation.
Another instance of Mr. Du Plessis' system was afforded by the case
of an old schoolmaster, an Englishman named Grant. He had been a
teacher upon the farm of a Boer near Pretoria. Through some
difference with his employer he was dismissed; and his own version of
the affair indicates that he suffered considerable injustice. From
the evidence given in the case in which he subsequently figured it
appeared that in order to urge his grievance he returned to the
Boer's farm and even re-entered the house which he had formerly
occupied. He was arrested and charged with trespass, or threatening
to molest his late employer and members of his family, and was bound
over to keep the peace for six months and to find £50 surety for the
same, failing which he should go to gaol for that period. This seemed
to be rather a harsh sentence to pass upon a man who was over fifty
years of age, entirely destitute of means, of very inferior physique,
and who had been charged at the instance of an individual who could
certainly have protected himself against five such men as Grant. No
doubt the accused was an eccentric man, and probably a nuisance,
and it is even possible that his conduct left the magistrate no
alternative but to pass the sentence which he did: it is not intended
to question the justice of this part of the affair. Having been
sent to gaol, however, because he could not deposit £50, Grant was
treated as the commonest malefactor in all respects but one--he was
allowed to retain his own clothing. The unfortunate old man made a
pathetic picture with his seedy clothes, tail coat, tall white hat,
and worn gloves, which he punctiliously wore whenever called upon to
face the authorities--and it happened rather frequently. He objected
to being classed and herded with the thieves and murderers and others
whose crimes were even more repulsive. He protested against the class
of food that was served to him. For these remonstrances he at first
received solitary confinement and even poorer diet; and later with a
brutality which one can surely only find in a Du Plessis the
unfortunate old man was placed in the Kaffir stocks, thrown out in
the middle of the yard that he might be humiliated in the sight of
all, and kept there in the fierce heat of a tropical sun for half a
day. The sole excuse for this was that he had been unruly in
protesting against the treatment which he was receiving. The
spectacle excited the pity of the Reform prisoners to such an extent
that even with the certainty of an insulting rebuff from the gaoler
they endeavoured to represent the man's case so as to have him
released, but without success. It need only be added that the
unfortunate man did not serve his entire term, the first act of the
first released Reformers being to pay up the surety required and
provide him with funds to leave the country. Grant may have been as
guilty and offensive as eccentricity can make a man, but nothing can
justify the manner in which he was treated.
The stocks in the hands of Du Plessis were not the mild corrective
instrument which they are sometimes considered to be. According to
this authority the stocks can be made to inflict various degrees of
punishment. Du Plessis states that when he took over the gaol he
found that the custom was to place men in the stocks within a cell
and to trust to the irksomeness of the position and the solitary
confinement to bring about a better frame of mind; but he soon found
that this system was capable of improvement. His first act was to
place the prisoners white or black in the stocks in the middle of the
yard, so that they should be exposed to the observation and remarks
of all the officials and visitors and their fellow-prisoners. In
explaining the reasons for this change, he said that he found that
in a cool cell a man could be tolerably comfortable and that even the
most hardened of them preferred not to be seen in the stocks by
others; whereas in the yard they were obliged to sit on the uneven
gravel and to endure the heat of the sun as well as being 'the
cynosure of every eye.' But this did not satisfy the ingenious Du
Plessis. The yard of the Pretoria gaol inclines from south to north
about one foot in four, and Du Plessis' observant eye detected that
the prisoners invariably sat facing down the slope--for of course
they were not allowed to lie down while in the stocks, this being too
comfortable a position. Upon studying the question he found that in
this way much more ease was experienced owing to the more obtuse
angle thus formed by the body and the legs. This did not suit him and
he issued further orders that in future all prisoners in the stocks
should be obliged to sit facing uphill, and that they should not be
allowed to hold on to the stocks in order to maintain themselves in
this position but should have to preserve the upright posture of the
body by means of the exertion of the muscles of the back alone.
Needless to say the maintenance of such a position for hours at a
time caused an agony of aches which many prisoners were quite unable
to endure, and frequently the men were seen to throw themselves back
and lie down at the risk of being kicked up by the vigilant Du
Plessis and confined in the stocks for a longer period than was
originally intended. Nor did this complete the list of Mr. Du
Plessis' ingenuities. The stocks had been built to accommodate
several persons at the same time, and he found that by inserting the
legs in the alternate holes, instead of in the pair as designed by
the architect of the stocks, the increased spread of the legs caused
still greater strain upon his victim. This was reserved for special
cases--say one in every four or five.
The incidents here given illustrating the methods of this delectable
individual were all witnessed by the Reformers. The account of Du
Plessis may serve the purpose of showing the methods practised under
a Government whose officials are appointed whenever possible from the
family circle and not because of fitness. It is more especially
designed to show the character of the man in whose hands the
prisoners were placed with almost absolute discretion; the man who
enjoys the privilege of discussing with his relative President
Kruger, at any hour at which he may choose to visit the Presidency,
the treatment to be accorded to his victims; the man who is retained
in his position in spite of repeated exposures by his superiors, and
who is credited with exercising very considerable influence with Mr.
Kruger; but, above all, the man in whose charge remain up to the
present time{37} the two Reformers, Messrs. Sampson and Davies, who
declined to sign any petition, and concerning whom Du Plessis stated
openly: 'Wait until the others have gone, and if the Government leave
them in my hands, I'll make them ready to sign anything.' Sufficient
has been said concerning this individual to warrant the description
publicly given of him by Colonel Rhodes{38}--'A brutal and inhuman
wretch!' Like most bullies the man is also a coward. When he
witnessed the outburst of feeling among the prisoners in consequence
of the death of their comrade, he would not venture into the
precincts of the gaol for two days, until assured that the men had
again become capable of self-control.
So much for the details of gaol life.
In the meantime sympathy with the prisoners began to take practical
form, and the unanimity of feeling on their behalf throughout South
Africa, which was quite unexpected and which greatly embarrassed
the Boer Government, tended to bring matters to a head. Mr. Rose
Innes, who had so generously and constantly exerted himself in
Pretoria in order to obtain some amelioration of the condition of the
prisoners, and who had in his official capacity as watching the case
for the Imperial Government made a very strong report to the Colonial
Office, did not content himself with these exertions. Upon his return
to Capetown he suggested and organized the getting up of a monster
petition to the President and Executive, urging upon them in the
interests of the peace of South Africa to release the imprisoned men.
The petitions were to represent the views of every town and village
in South Africa, and were to be presented by the mayors or municipal
heads of the communities. In this movement Mr. Rose Innes was most
ably seconded by Mr. Edmund Garrett, the editor of the _Cape Times,_
and other prominent men. A movement of this nature naturally excited
considerable attention in Pretoria; but the success of it was wholly
unexpected. The President and his party had played to the South
African gallery, and they had not yet realized that they had in any
way overdone the theatrical part. They had no suspicion of the real
feeling with which the sentences were regarded, nor of the extent to
which they had alienated sympathy by that and the subsequent
'magnanimous' action. 'Magnanimity by inches' had been placarded
throughout South Africa, and the whole game was characterized as one
of cat and mouse, in which the President was playing with his victims
with indifference to the demands of justice and humanity, partly with
a view to wringing concessions from the British Government, and
partly from a mistaken idea that by such a course he would obtain
credit at each step afresh for dealing generously with those who were
at his mercy.
The movement had been well organized. The resolution had been passed
in every town in South Africa, even including the towns of the Free
State. The mayors (over 200 in number) were on their way to Pretoria,
when the President, with his back against the wall, realized for the
first time that he had overshot the mark and that unless he released
the men before the arrival of the deputies he would either have to
do so apparently at their instance, or refuse to do so and risk
rousing a dangerous feeling. He chose the former course; he released
all the imprisoned men with the exception of the four who had been
sentenced to death and the two who had refused to appeal. Pretoria
and Johannesburg were already full of deputies and visitors from Cape
Colony, Natal, and the Free State, all bound on the same errand of
mercy. The feelings of these men, brought many hundreds of miles from
their homes, sacrificing their own business and personal convenience
in order to approach the President and to support a measure which
they felt to be imperatively necessary to the allaying of feeling in
South Africa may be imagined, but were not expressed, when they heard
that they had been allowed to undertake this journey as part of the
President's game, only to receive a slap in the face from His Honour
by the carrying out of the measure before they were permitted to
interview him. This at least was what was felt to be the case upon
the release of the majority. Absolute proof of it was forthcoming
within the week, when the President refused to receive the
deputations and kept them waiting in Pretoria until he had released
the four leaders as well, without allowing the delegates the
satisfaction of a courteous recognition of their mission. He admitted
them it is true to an informal interview, in the course of which he
managed to insult and outrage the feelings of a good many by
lecturing them and giving vent to very candid opinions as to their
personal action and duties; but he would not receive their
representatives officially.
On May 30 the prisoners with the exception of the six already
referred to were released, the terms being that their fines should be
paid at once, and the unexpired term of imprisonment remitted. Each
one as released was required to bind himself for the term of three
years, reckoned from the 30th day of May, 1896, neither directly nor
indirectly to meddle in the internal or external politics of the
South African Republic, and to conduct himself as a law-abiding
citizen of the State.
In some cases the provision was added that if in the opinion of the
Executive Council the terms of this undertaking should be broken,
the sentence of banishment which was held in suspense would come into
force, and the men were required to sign this addendum to the above
undertaking. The resolution of the Executive Council, which deals
with the mitigation of the sentences, states that the imprisonment
portions of the sentences are remitted; that the fines (£2,000 in all
cases) must be paid at once; and that the banishment shall remain in
abeyance subject to the faithful observance of the above undertaking;
but that should any action be taken by any of the prisoners
constituting in the opinion of the Executive Council a breach of the
above undertaking, the sentence of banishment shall come into force.
There is no definition of the phrase 'meddle in politics,' nor is
there any indication of what in the opinion of the Executive Council
constitutes politics. There is of course on record the President's
own statement in public that he would not permit any discussion on
the dynamite and railway questions because they are matters of 'high
politics'; and if haply the Executive should also hold this view, it
is difficult to see how any of the prisoners will be able to follow
their ordinary business and attend to those commercial affairs in
which they are concerned without committing some breach of this
ridiculous provision.
No answer was received to the many representations made on behalf of
the four leaders, except that the Government were busy with the
matter. Upon the release of the other prisoners it was suggested to
them by friends outside that it would be a proper and politic course
to proceed in a body to the Presidency and thank the President for
the action he had taken in their respect, and at the same time to beg
of him to extend a similar clemency to the four leaders who were
still left in gaol. Most of the men were dead against taking any such
action. They held very strongly to the opinion that they had been
arrested by treachery, condemned by arrangement, and played with as
counters in an unscrupulous manner. They recognized no obligation
towards the President. They could see no magnanimity in a policy
which had secured their arrest under the circumstances described
which inveigled them into pleading guilty to a nominal offence,
and which imposed upon them a sentence such as that passed. They
considered the enormous fine which they were then called upon to
pay to say nothing of the imprisonment which they had already
suffered wholly disproportionate to the offence, and their natural
impulse was to avoid the man who was directly responsible for it all,
or at least not to meet him under circumstances so unequal, when they
would be sure to be insulted, and would be obliged to suffer the
insult in silence.
Some of them however yielded to the representations of their friends,
who considered that it should be done for the sake of the men who
were not yet released; whilst there were others who expressed the
view that they would rather go back and do their imprisonment than
suffer the humiliation which it was proposed to inflict; that they
would not do it for themselves, and they could not bring themselves
to do it for anybody else. A considerable number of the prisoners
called upon His Honour; and this was the 'dog' interview. After
hearing the address of the men the President proceeded to pat himself
and his people on the back, saying that he knew he had behaved with
great magnanimity and moderation, and that he hoped that such
generosity would not be entirely thrown away.
'You must know,' he said, 'that I sometimes have to punish my dogs;
and I find that there are dogs of two kinds. Some of them who are
good come back and lick my boots. Others get away at a distance and
snarl at me. I see that some are still snarling. I am glad that you
are not like them.'
Those among his hearers who could understand His Honour's remarks,
although they had been prepared for much, were certainly not prepared
for this. The interpreter stood for a moment without rendering into
English the metaphor chosen by the worthy President, and even His
Honour--slow to perceive where he has transgressed the limits of
etiquette and good breeding--gathered from the expressions upon the
faces that something was wrong, and turning to the interpreter, said:
'Oh, that's only my joke! Don't interpret that to them.'
But those who witnessed it say that there was no joke in his voice or
his eye as he said it. Proceeding then with more circumspection he
walked out his dog in another form, and said that it was very well to
punish the little dogs as he had punished them, but somebody should
also punish the big dog--evidently referring to Mr. Rhodes--and in
the course of a homily he again mixed his parable, sticking all the
time to his dog however, remarking in conclusion that it was very
well to punish the dogs, but what was to happen to the owner of the
dogs, who stood by urging them on and crying 'Tsaa!'?
Throughout the week His Honour continued to make the homely dog work
to good purpose, but the interview with the released Reformers was,
it is believed, the first occasion upon which he made use of it.
Certainly on no other occasion did the President do such ample
justice to his reputation as a finished diplomat.
In the mean time negotiations had been proceeding for obtaining the
release of the leaders. The friends and representatives of the four
prisoners had become subject to all manner of attentions from numbers
of people in Pretoria; near relations of the President himself,
high-placed Government officials, their relatives, hangers-on,
prominent Boers, and persons of all sorts and descriptions, all
offered their services and indicated means by which the thing could
be arranged. All wanted money--personal bribes. The prisoners
themselves were similarly approached, and they who a month previously
had been condemned to death witnessed with disgust a keen competition
among their enemies for the privilege of effecting--at a price--their
release. Day after day they were subjected to the disgusting
importunities of these men--men who a little while before had been
vaunting their patriotism and loudly expressing a desire to prove it
by hanging these same Reformers.
The gaoler Du Plessis, representing himself as having been sent by
the President, suggested to the four men that they should 'make a
petition.' They declined to do so. Du Plessis was then reinforced by
the Chief Commissioner of Police, and the two officials again urged
this course but stated that they did not wish it to be known that
they had been sent by the Executive and therefore could not
consent to their names being used. Upon these terms the prisoners
again declined. They said that if they were to hold any communication
with the Government they required to have it on record that they did
so at the suggestion of the two responsible gaol officials who
represented themselves as expressing the wish of the Executive
Council. After further delay and consultations with the President and
others the two officials above named consented to allow their names
to be used in the manner indicated. Not content with this the
prisoners demanded that they should be allowed to send an independent
messenger to the President to ascertain whether he really required a
written appeal for revision of sentence. Having received confirmation
in this manner the four men addressed a letter to the Executive
Council. In this letter they stated that they had been sentenced to
death; that the death-sentence had been commuted; and that they
understood--but had received no authoritative information on the
subject--that they were to suffer instead a term of fifteen years'
imprisonment. They suggested the imposition of a monetary penalty in
place of the imprisonment; they stated that they held and represented
important interests in the State and that they believed their release
would tend to the restoration of confidence and favourable conditions
in the business community of the Rand; and they concluded by saying
that, if the Executive saw fit to adopt this suggestion, they the
prisoners would return to their business in good faith.
It had frequently been intimated to these men that it would be
impossible for the Government to impose a fine in place of the
death-sentence because money so obtained would be blood-money.
Reference had been made in the Executive Council to Biblical
precedents, notably the case of Judas, and the opinion was held that
if blood-money were taken the Lord would visit His wrath upon the
people.
The Boers are in their way a very religious people. But they are also
essentially practical; and it is difficult to find an instance in
which the religious principle has operated to their commercial
disadvantage. This at any rate was not one. The train of reasoning
which led them to justify the imposition of a fine was somewhat in
this wise: To _impose a fine_ would be to take blood-money, and
would be immoral and iniquitous: to _accept the offer of a present_
on condition that the sentence should be entirely remitted however
would be quite another thing.
So negotiations were set on foot to induce the prisoners to make the
necessary offer; and the prisoners, as has been shown, did so. This
satisfied the religious scruple of the Boer, but the terms of the
offer were not satisfactory to his commercial requirements. It became
necessary to make a definite offer. Further negotiations followed,
and the prisoners gathered that an offer of £10,000 apiece would be
viewed with favour by the President and his advisers; and it was
stated by members of the Volksraad and prominent officials who were
in the confidence of and in communication with the Government that,
in the event of such a contingency arising as the prisoners making an
offer of cash, the Executive would not take the money for the benefit
of the State but would accept it for charitable purposes--an
educational institute or a hospital or some such object.
This was communicated to the prisoners by the personages referred to,
and an offer was accordingly made of £10,000 apiece. The matter was
discussed in the Executive Council, and the Boer, true to his
instinct and record, perceived an opportunity to improve his
position. The religious gentlemen who would not take blood-money now
objected that the amount proposed was altogether too small, and the
President with that readiness so characteristic of him observed that
he thought the prisoners must have made a mistake, and meant £40,000
apiece instead of £40,000 for the lot.
Another delay ensued, and in the meanwhile more and more deputies
flocked to Pretoria, and stronger grew the feeling, and more angry,
disappointed, and disgusted grew the communities of Johannesburg and
Pretoria. The President, however, played his game unmoved by any such
considerations.
The next announcement from the Executive was a wholly unexpected one.
It was that they felt it necessary to consult Judge Gregorowski as to
the amount of money which ought to be taken as a donation to
charities. The matter of assessing the value of a death-sentence in
cash might perhaps be deemed a perplexing and a difficult one from
lack of precedent, yet nobody supposed the Executive Council to be
unequal to the task. It might also seem unfair to impose this further
burden of responsibility upon a judge; but Mr. Gregorowski had proved
himself superior to precedent and untrammelled by custom; and there
was much to be said in favour of continuing an association which had
worked very satisfactorily so far.
When however the President, with that resolute determination to be
generous which was so well advertised, at last overcame all obstacles
and succeeded in holding a meeting of his advisers to receive Mr.
Gregorowski's report, and when it was found that that gentleman
assessed capital punishment at £25,000 per head, the Executive
Council with one accord avowed themselves to be so utterly taken by
surprise by the announcement that they required time to think the
matter over and decide upon a course of action.
No doubt this opinion of Mr. Gregorowski's took them quite as much by
surprise as did his original sentences. However in the course of a
day or two they had recovered sufficiently to intimate to the
prisoners that, if they would amend their first offer of £40,000 for
the four and make it one of £40,000 apiece, the Executive would
decline to accept so large a sum, as being greater than they
considered equitable and would reply that in the opinion of the
Government £25,000 apiece would be sufficient. It was quite plainly
intimated that this procedure presented certain attractions to the
President, who desired for political purposes to exhibit further
magnanimity. The prisoners who by this time had gained some insight
into Mr. Kruger's methods, who knew from past experience the value of
his promises, and who could find no record in history to encourage
them in participating to this extent in the confidence trick,
point-blank refused to have anything to do with it.
They agreed to make a formal offer of a 'reasonable' fine, leaving
the interpretation of this to the Government, but only on the
distinct understanding that the amount should not exceed £25,000
each. They had learned that Mr. Gregorowski had fixed this amount and
that the Executive had agreed to accept it, and they would not offer
a penny more for magnanimity or anything else. They stated in
plain terms that they looked upon this matter simply as a bargain;
that if they should get out they were paying their way out, and that
in so far as their release from the position was concerned the
transaction was closed upon business terms and there should be no
question afterwards as to gratitude or magnanimity. The fines were
paid,{39} and on July 11 the leaders were released.
Messrs. Phillips, Farrar, and Hammond, who were compelled through
their business ties to continue their association with the Transvaal,
signed the same undertaking concerning politics as that given by the
rest of the prisoners--with the difference that in their case it
operates for a period of fifteen years. Colonel Rhodes however
declined to give the required undertaking and elected to take his
sentence of fifteen years' banishment. On the night of June 11
therefore he was sent across the border under escort, and passing
through the Free State proceeded at once to Matabeleland to render
what assistance he could to his brother in the suppression of the
rebellion. As though the excitement of the past few months had not
been sufficient, it may be added that in the first engagement in
which he took part on his arrival at Buluwayo his horse was shot, and
he narrowly escaped the same fate himself.
From time to time adverse comment has been made on the subject of
this undertaking of the Reformers to abstain from further
participation in politics. The position of the Reformers was this:
They had entered upon the movement to obtain the redress of certain
matters closely affecting their feelings as men and their interests
and business as settlers in the country. They were disarmed and
placed at the mercy of the Boer Government by the action of England's
Representative. To decline to give the pledge required would entail
banishment, which would in many cases mean ruin to them and in all
cases would remove them from the sphere in which they might yet
contribute to the attainment of the ends they had in view. The only
compensating consideration possible in such a course would be that
the redress desired would be effected through the influence of the
Imperial Government; but since the Imperial Government had shown
that under the circumstances they were neither willing nor able to
maintain to a logical conclusion the position which they took up when
they secured disarmament, the Reformers concluded that their obvious
course was to give the required undertaking. It is true that several
among them did decline to give this undertaking, saying that they
would prefer to serve their terms of imprisonment; but they received
the answer that after the term of two years' imprisonment the
Government would still require the undertaking or enforce the
banishment clause, so that it appeared to them there was no way out
of it but to sign what was required and wait patiently.
It is perfectly obvious that one of two alternatives will present
itself. Either the Government will come to regard this provision as a
dead letter, and wholly ignore it; or some of the men, in the course
of their business and in dealing with economic questions such as they
are morally entitled to discuss will fall foul of the 'opinion of the
Executive.' The issue will then be a very clear one, and many of
those who were strongly opposed to the Reformers on the premisses on
which they started will find themselves in cordial agreement with
them in later developments.{40}
The Reform movement closed for the time being with the release of the
leaders. Sixty-four men had been committed for trial. From four of
them the Government had received £100,000, and from fifty-six others
£112,000. One was dead; one had fallen so seriously ill before the
trial that he was unable to present himself with the rest, but on
recovering and announcing his intention to plead 'Not guilty' and
fight it out, the case against him was withdrawn.
There remained two men, Messrs. Sampson and Davies, whose case the
Government had refused to consider because they declined to appeal.
They had been sentenced on April 28 to two years' imprisonment and
£2,000 fine, or failing payment to another year's imprisonment, and
to three years' banishment; and under that sentence do they lie at
the present moment in the Pretoria gaol, at the mercy of the Boer
Government and its very competent representative Mr. Du Plessis.{41}
Much _kudos_ has accrued to Mr. Kruger for his magnanimity and much
profit for his astuteness! Great credit is also given to Mr.
Chamberlain for his prompt impartiality. And surely some day a
tribute of sympathy and admiration will go out from a people who like
pluck and who love fair play to two Englishmen who hold that a solemn
pledge is something which even a Boer should hold to, whilst
self-respect is more than liberty and beyond all price.
Footnotes for Chapter IX
{35} This was done on the second day--after a night without any
ventilation at all.
{36} See Appendix E.
{37} (July, 1899.) They were released in June, 1897.
{38} Du Plessis' threats regarding Messrs. Sampson and Davies were
made so openly and vengefully that Colonel F.W. Rhodes deemed it to
be his duty as soon as he was released to report the matter to the
High Commissioner, with a view to ensuring some measure of protection
for the two gentlemen above referred to. After the release of
the other prisoners, Du Plessis was for a time suspended, owing
to charges laid against him by the Inspector of Prisons. No
investigation appears however to have been made, and the man was
reinstated. During the month of September, after Messrs. Sampson and
Davies had already done five months of their sentence in Pretoria
Gaol, this man, finding himself unable to break their spirit by other
means, made a proposal to the Government to separate the two and to
place them in two small country gaols at wide distances apart and far
removed from the friendly offices and watchful eyes of their friends,
and thus deprive them of such benefit as they may be able _in the
future_ to get from proximity to the official representative of
England. In the past they have certainly derived none.
{39} It seems like reflecting on the reader's intelligence to add
that nothing more has been heard of the 'charities.'
{40} (July, 1899.) A clear indication of the Government's disposition
towards the Reformers was given by the treatment accorded to Mr.
Lionel Phillips. In consequence of a publication by Sir John
Willoughby of an article on the subject of the Raid, which failed to
accurately represent the facts as they were present to the minds of
the Reformers, Mr. Phillips wrote an article in the _Nineteenth
Century_ magazine, which was purely historical, moderate in tone, and
obviously designed only as an answer to the allegations which had
been made. The Executive Council arrived at the conclusion that it
was a breach of his undertaking to abstain from interference in
politics, and they issued a decree of banishment against him. As Mr.
Phillips had taken up his residence permanently in Europe, and as it
was well known that it would be extremely inconvenient for him to
return to South Africa in order to dispute this action it was
generally considered that the object of the move was to establish
a precedent, so to say, on the cheap, and in the same spirit to
intimidate others among the Reformers who were believed not to have
lost their interest in the cause of reform nor to have abandoned
their intention to begin again as soon as they were free to do so. It
is no exaggeration to say that scarcely a week could have passed
during the last two and a half years in which some or all of the half
dozen Uitlanders most prominent in the cause of reform have not been
in receipt of a warning of one kind or another, ranging from
apparently friendly advice not to take too keen an interest in
certain matters, up to the giddy eminence of being black listed in
the Dutch papers as one of those to be dragged out and shot without
trial as a traitor and a rebel. Such are the conditions under which
the unarmed Uitlanders labour for reform.
{41} (July, 1899.) Du Plessis was promoted to be Chief Inspector of
Prisons shortly after the release of Messrs. Sampson and Davies,
and still holds that post!
PART II.
A POSTSCRIPT.
CHAPTER X.
THREE YEARS' GRACE.
Very seldom has any community been in a position so unsatisfactory as
that in which the people of Johannesburg found themselves in the year
1896. Judgments passed in the heat of the moment upon matters which
had not been properly explained, and which in many cases were
completely obscured by deliberate misrepresentation, had incurred for
the community dislike contempt and mistrust which were wholly
undeserved. Those who knew the facts and who were able and willing to
speak, the Reformers themselves, were bonded to abstain from politics
for three years under penalty of banishment. Betrayed, deserted,
muzzled, helpless, hopeless, and divided, no community could have
been in a more unsatisfactory condition. It was abundantly clear that
the time had been allowed to pass when the Imperial Government might
have insisted upon reforms and the fulfilment of the President's
promises--not in the spirit in which they had been made, but in the
spirit in which the President himself had intended the world to
construe them. The impact of the revelations was too great to permit
of public judgment quickly recovering its balance. It was realized
that Mr. Kruger's effects had been admirably stage-managed and that
for the time being, and possibly for a very considerable time, the
Uitlanders were completely out of court. There were a few--but how
few!--whose faith was great and whose conviction that the truth must
prevail was abiding, who realized that there was nothing for it but
to begin all over again--to begin and to persevere upon sound lines;
and they took heart of such signs as there were and started afresh.
It has been an article of faith with them that Mr. Kruger missed
his supreme chance at the time of the trial of the Reformers, and
that from the date of the death-sentence his judgment and his luck
have failed him. He abused his good fortune and the luck turned, so
they say; and the events of the last three years go to support that
impression. To his most faithful ally amongst the Uitlanders the
President, in the latter days of 1896, commented adversely upon the
ingratitude of those Reformers who had not called to thank him for
his magnanimity; and this man replied: 'You must stop talking about
that, President, because people are laughing at you. You made a
bargain with them and they paid the price you asked, so now they owe
you nothing.' But his Honour angrily repudiated that construction:
nothing will convert him to that view.
It has been said that Dr. Jameson is the best friend Paul Kruger ever
had, and with equal truth it may be said that, in 1896, President
Kruger proved himself to be the best friend of the Reformers. Not
even the most sanguine of his enemies could have expected to witness
the impolitic and unjust acts by which the President revealed
himself, vindicated the Reformers, and undermined a position of
unparalleled strength in an incredibly short time. The bargaining and
the bad grace which marked the release of the Reformers had prepared
the world to view Mr. Kruger's action and attitude a little more
critically than it had hitherto been disposed to do. The real
conditions of Dr. Jameson's surrender had also become known, and
although the action of the Boer leaders was regarded as far too
trifling a matter to be seriously considered as against the Raid
itself, nevertheless a residuum of impression was left which helped
to form opinion at a later stage. There followed, too, an irritating
correspondence between the Transvaal and Imperial Governments, in the
course of which Dr. Leyds successfully established his skill as a
smart letter writer and his limitations as a statesman. The
Municipal Law, the first product of the 'forget and forgive'
proclamation--which proclamation, by-the-bye, had already begun to
prove itself an awkward weapon placed in the hands of his enemies by
President Kruger himself--had been exposed and denounced as farcical,
and it now required but little to convince the once admiring world of
the President's real character and intentions. That little was
forthcoming in a touch of ridicule more potent than all arguments.
The Transvaal Government formulated their demand for damages for the
Raid in a form which made everyone smile--£677,938 3s. 3d. for actual
outlay, and £1,000,000 for 'Moral and Intellectual Damages.' What
with the fines of the Reformers, and the seizure of the provisions of
all sorts acquired by them for the purposes of the Reform movement,
which latter must have exceeded £50,000 in value, the Boer Government
had already received upwards of a quarter of a million, and had, in
fact, made a profit on the Raid; so that this demand came as a
surprise even to the Uitlanders, as much perhaps due to the
extraordinary phrasing of the demand as to the amount claimed.
It may be wondered why, under provocation so great as that of
complete abandonment by the country whose representative had placed
them in their then hopeless position, no distinct movement took
place--no tendency even developed itself--among the Uitlanders
generally to unite with the Boers in favour of a Republican movement
throughout South Africa, to the exclusion of the Imperial power. In
answer to this it must be said that such an idea undoubtedly did take
strong hold of the non-British portion of the Uitlander population,
as witness the manner in which the Cape Colony Dutchmen, Hollanders,
Germans, and individuals of other European nationalities associated
themselves with the Boer party, almost invariably by open
declaration, and in many cases even by naturalization, thus
forfeiting their own national rights and obtaining nothing but vague
promises and the liability to military service in return. But the
Republican movement made no further headway than this because British
subjects formed the large majority of the Uitlanders. They had, it is
true, a great grievance against the Imperial Government; but against
the Transvaal Government they had one greater still; and it would
take a great deal to kill the passionate loyalty of the British South
African. It would be idle to discuss what might have happened had Mr.
Kruger seized his opportunity and let in a considerable section of
the then unenfranchised to strengthen the ranks of the Republican
party; that can only be a matter of individual conjecture. What is
certain, however, is that he did not do so and never intended to do
so; wherein his lack of statesmanship is again made manifest.
Mr. Kruger has carried out in its fullest (its best or its worst) the
characteristic principle of his people already referred to, that of
giving too little and asking too much. It is doing only bare justice
to the determination with which he adheres to the policy of his life
to say that he gives nothing to anybody. From the most distant to the
nearest he deals alike with all. With the people of Europe, he has
taxed their investments, disregarded their interests, and flouted
their advice; but nevertheless he has for years commanded their moral
support. In his dealings with the British Government, pushed as they
have been some half a dozen times to the very verge of war, he has
invariably come off with something for nothing. In his dealings with
the Uitlanders he has bartered promises and in return--_circumspice_!
In the matter of the events of 1895-6 he came out with a quarter of a
million in cash, a claim for £1,677,938 3s. 3d. odd (including Moral
and Intellectual Damages), and a balance of injured innocence which
may not be expressed in figures. In his dealings with Cape Colony he
has taxed the products of their land and industry, he went to the
verge of war to destroy their trade in the case of the closing of the
Vaal River drifts, he has permitted the Netherlands Railway to so
arrange its tariffs as to divert traffic from them to other parts, he
has refused to their people (his own flesh and blood, among whom he
was born) the most elementary rights when they settle in his country!
And yet in his need he calls upon them, and they come! His treatment
of the Orange Free State has been exactly the same. Their grievance
against him is incomparably worse, because of their liability to
become involved in the consequences of a policy which they are not
allowed to influence. But President Kruger is, above all things,
practical. Everything is gauged by the measure of the advantage which
it can bring to him; and his treatment of the Free State is
determined by their utility to him and his power over them, and is
not influenced by their moral claims upon his good will. Natal and
Portugal have their experience of broken agreements and strained
interpretations, of intrigues with native subjects and neighbours
for the extension of rights or boundaries, all designed to benefit
the Transvaal and to undermine them. All, all with the same result!
Something for nothing! Within the borders of the Transvaal the policy
is the same. Moral rights and the claims of justice are unrecognized.
For services rendered there may be some return; a privilege, a
contract, an appointment. But this cannot be properly regarded as a
neglect of principle upon Mr. Kruger's part, for after all the reward
is at the expense of the Uitlanders. It is usually the least price at
which the service could be secured; and it is generally in such
form as to give the recipient a profit in which the members of the
Government party largely share, but it never confers a power to
which the President himself is not superior; indeed, it is almost
invariably hedged about by such conditions as to make its continuance
dependent upon the President's good will. If any one should
think this description of conditions in the Transvaal and of the
President's policy to be unduly harsh, let him satisfy himself by an
investigation of those matters which appear on merely superficial
examination to support opinions contrary to those expressed by the
writer. Let him examine the terms of the closer union with the Free
State, the circumstances leading to the closing of the Vaal River
drifts, the condition of the Dutch subjects of Cape Colony and of the
Orange Free State in the Transvaal, the Netherlands Railway tariffs
as they operate against Cape Colony and the Free State, the Railway
Agreement with Natal, the disputes with Portugal, the attempts to
acquire native territory on the East Coast, the terms of the
Netherlands Railway Concession, Selati Railway Concession, Dynamite
Concession--in fact, all other concessions, monopolies, contracts,
privileges, appointments, and rights, made, granted, or entered
into by President Kruger to or with his friends. Let him recall the
treatment and the fate of some of those to whom ampler reference
will be made later on; for instance, Chief Justice Kotzé and
Judge Ameshof, who in the dealings with the Reformers rendered
valuable--but perhaps injudicious and unjudicial--service, as already
sufficiently described; the treatment of Dr. Coster, the State
Attorney, who also deserved better of the President; the public
repudiation of Mr. J.B. Robinson, whose friendship for President
Kruger had been frequently and amply evidenced to the grave
dissatisfaction of the Uitlander population; the public and insulting
repudiation of Sir Henry de Villiers, the Chief Justice of Cape
Colony, after he had served his purpose! The result of any such
inquiry must confirm the conclusion that 'something for nothing' is
the President's policy and achievement.
A policy or a movement which is to involve the cooperation of
thousands of intelligent men cannot be carried out upon such terms,
and this may be regarded as the main reason why the spirit of
Republicanism did not generally itself develop under circumstances
apparently so favourable to it. The President's policy may be
considered astute or unwise according to the point of view from which
it is regarded. Viewed from the standpoint of the State itself,
undoubtedly it fails lamentably in statesmanship. In the interests of
the Boer party, however, or of the man Paul Kruger, it may well be
doubted whether the policy may not be a token of remarkable sagacity.
He knows his own limitations and the limitations of his people. He
knows that to freely admit to a share in the Government a number of
intelligent people, would make a continuance of himself or his party
in absolute power for any length of time a matter of utter
impossibility. In these circumstances the problem which President
Kruger had set himself was a remarkably difficult one. To
republicanize South Africa, to secure the support of the majority of
the white inhabitants, and yet to yield no whit of power to those by
whose aid he would achieve his object, would indeed be carrying to
sublime heights the policy of 'something for nothing.'
Many years before the Raid Mr. Kruger had a well-defined policy to
republicanize South Africa, and the Uitlanders of the Transvaal were
quite alive to it, as may be gathered by reference to their
newspapers. But the voice was as a voice crying in the wilderness in
those days, and, as has been said, it required the Jameson Raid to
advertize the conditions in the Transvaal and to direct attention to
what had been proclaimed unheeded for many years. Immediately prior
to the Raid Mr. Kruger was floundering in a morass of difficulties.
The policy of 'something for nothing' had been exposed, and it was
seen through by all the Dutchmen in South Africa and was resented by
all save his own little party in the Transvaal; but the Jameson Raid
gave the President a jumping-off place on solid ground, and he was
not slow to take advantage of it.
It is not too much to say that the vast majority of people in Europe
and America are indebted to Dr. Jameson for any knowledge which they
may have acquired of the Transvaal and its Uitlander problem. Theirs
is a disordered knowledge, and perhaps it is not unnatural that they
should in a manner share the illusion of the worthy sailor who, after
attending divine service, assaulted the first Israelite he met
because he had only just heard of the Crucifixion. A number of worthy
people are still disposed to excuse many things in the Transvaal
because of the extreme provocation given by the Jameson Raid. The
restrictions upon English education are considered to be 'not
unnatural when one remembers the violent attempt to swamp the Dutch.'
The excessive armaments are held to be 'entirely justifiable
considering what has happened.' The building of forts is 'an ordinary
precaution.' The prohibiting of public meetings is 'quite wrong, of
course, but can you wonder at it?' Many of these worthy people will,
no doubt, learn with pained surprise that all these things were among
the causes which led to the Reform movement of 1895-6, and are not
the consequences of that movement as they erroneously suppose. The
Press Law and Public Meetings Act had been passed; arms had been
imported and ordered in tens of thousands; machine guns and
quantities of ammunition also; forts were being built;{42} the
suppression of all private schools had been advocated by Dr.
Mansvelt--all long, long before the Jameson Raid. So also had the
republican propaganda been at work, but it had not caught on outside
the two Republics.
Difficult as his task might appear, Mr. Kruger had now command of the
two great persuasive forces--money and sentiment. With the money he
pushed on the forts, and imported immense quantities of big guns,
small arms, and ammunition--far in excess of what could possibly be
used by the whole of the Boer population of the Transvaal after
making every allowance for spare arms in reserve; and such an
extraordinary supply was not unnaturally believed to be designed for
the use of others outside the Transvaal. More than this, an army of
emissaries, agents, and spies in the pay of the Transvaal Government
were spread about the Free State, Cape Colony, and Natal. Newspapers
were supported in different parts of South Africa and a considerable
amount of money was spent upon the Press in France and Germany.
It would be absurd to suggest and it would be unjust to let it be
inferred that all those who were drawn into sympathy with the Boers
supported or were even cognizant of President Kruger's ultimate aim.
It is an everyday experience that the scope of work and ambition
expands as one progresses. Whether the strong man really sees his
ultimate goal and tackles with magnificent courage the innumerable
and seemingly insurmountable obstacles which lie between him and it,
or whether in the wisdom and mercy of Providence there is such an
adjustment of courage and foresight as prevents him from seeing more
than he is able to face, who can say? But what is beyond all doubt is
that, given the one strong man who does know his mind, he will lead
as the Pied Piper led, and there is no thought in his following to
ask the whither and the why.
Given the sympathy and the means, the difficulty of President
Kruger's self-imposed task was not so great as at first appeared. To
some it was advisable to do no more than point to the Jameson Raid
and say: 'We only wish to live in peace and to be left alone.' To
some again that act is construed as a sign that the British people
wish to upset the two Republics, therefore they must strengthen and
be prepared. To others the appeal is made: 'We Dutch are the settlers
and owners of the country, we wish for peace, of course, but we must
dominate--you under your form of government, we under ours.'
To others again it is further advanced: 'Let us negotiate the
elimination of the Imperial power; we do not suggest fight, but if we
present a united front they must retire peacefully and concede our
demands.' And lastly comes the appeal to those who are in sympathy
with the advanced republicans: 'Arm and prepare. Some day we shall
find England in a difficulty, divided by party or hampered by
external complications; it has often happened before and we have
always profited. That will be our time to drive them out.'
It would be very unjust to some of the most prominent men on the
Dutch side in Cape Colony to leave the slenderest grounds for the
inference that they are to be associated with the extreme and
actively disloyal aim. All that it is intended to do is to indicate
the fine gradations in arguments by which a number are drawn
together--under a leadership which they do not realize, and going
they know not where! The strongest of these arguments and appeals are
particularly popular with the younger generation of Dutch South
Africans who entertain a visionary scheme of independence suggested
by the history of the United States. But there is something more
serious in it than this, as may be deduced from the fact that in
December, 1896, the writer was approached by Mr. D.P. Graaff,
formerly a prominent member of the Cape Legislative Council and now
as always a prominent Afrikander Bondsman, with the suggestion that
all the South African born should combine in the effort to create the
United States of South Africa, 'upon friendly terms with England, but
confining the direct Imperial right in South Africa to a naval
base at Simonstown and possibly a position in Natal.' This
concession--from South Africa to England--would not, it was argued,
involve disadvantage to the former, because for a considerable time
it would be necessary to preserve friendly relations with England and
to have the protection of her fleet for the coast.
It is of course quite easy to attach too much importance to the
opinions of individual politicians of this class, who are as a rule
merely shouters with the biggest crowd; but the prominent association
of such an apostle of republicanism with the Bond, and the fact that
he should have gone so far with a Reformer of known strong British
sympathies seem to warrant the attaching of some importance to the
suggestion.{43} A similar suggestion was made to several of the
Reformers at the time of the judicial crisis by one of the judges of
the Transvaal High Court, when it was hoped to enlist the sympathies
of the Uitlanders with a movement to curtail President Kruger's power
and to establish republicanism on a firmer basis in South Africa. In
order to forestall an obvious comment, it may be said that discussion
was in both cases declined on the ground that it would be
participating in politics in the sense forbidden by President
Kruger's three years' ban.
The year 1896 was a very bad one for the whole of South Africa.
Besides the Raid and the suspense and disorganization entailed by the
prolonged trial, the terrible dynamite explosion in Johannesburg,{44}
the still more terrible rebellion and massacre in Rhodesia, and the
crushing visitation of the great cattle scourge, the Rinderpest,
helped to produce a deplorable state of affairs in the Transvaal.
Then there was another thing which rankled badly: Messrs. Sampson and
Davies were still in gaol.{45} The feeling throughout South Africa
was reflected in the monotonous announcement which appeared in the
_Cape Times_ week by week for thirteen months:--'To-day Messrs.
Sampson and Davies complete the--week of their imprisonment in
Pretoria gaol for the crime of not signing a petition.' It seemed
scarcely credible that the President should still harbour any
illusions about his magnanimity; nevertheless, for some weeks before
the celebration of the Queen's Record reign it was rumoured that the
two prisoners were to be released upon that occasion as a mark of his
Honour's sympathy. Opinion had not been unanimous upon the attitude
of either the President or the prisoners; but an ugly incident
silenced most of the President's apologists. Gold stealing and the
purchase of stolen gold were being carried on such a scale and with
such impunity that at last, in desperation, the directors and
officials of one of the big mining companies (the City and Suburban
G.M. Co.), at the risk of being shot by desperadoes, took upon
themselves the functions of the detectives and police. They caught
'red-handed' two notorious characters and delivered them over, with
the gold in their possession, to the authorities. The thieves
actually boasted then that nothing would happen to them as they had
'made it all right;' and a few days later one of them was allowed to
escape out of the Court-house buildings which stand in the middle of
a large square. The other was convicted and sentenced to six months'
imprisonment. He was a criminal of a bad and dangerous type, the head
of a gang known to be concerned in gold stealing and burglary as a
profession. The penalty was regarded by all parties as most
inadequate and the judge himself commented adversely upon the
drafting of the law which tended to screen the prisoner. Not one
mitigating circumstance was forthcoming! And yet, whilst ignoring a
fresh outburst of protest against the detention of Messrs. Sampson
and Davies, and whilst the Industrial Commission was exposing the
gold thefts and denouncing the complicity of the police, Mr. Kruger
decided to remit three-fourths of the sentence and to discharge
the thief unconditionally. Is it to be wondered that such ill-advised
action called to mind the prisoners' boast, and that it was
contrasted prominently with the treatment of the two Reformers?
Three events of importance marked the year 1897 in the history of the
Transvaal. The first was the High Court crisis in February; the
second, the appointment of the Industrial Commission of Inquiry; the
third, the Queen's Record Reign celebration.
The High Court crisis arose out of the case of Brown _v._ The State,
already referred to.{46} Brown had acted within his legal rights
according to the terms of a proclamation. That proclamation had been
illegally withdrawn, and the Government realizing that they would
have to stand the consequences of their action in the courts of the
country, introduced a law which was immediately passed by the
Volksraad, absolving them from all liability, and practically
non-suiting all claimants. Mr. Kotzé in his judgment declared this
law to be improper and in conflict with the Constitution, and gave
judgment in favour of Brown, but left the amount of damages to be
determined later after hearing further evidence.{47}
The first Volksraad was then in special session, and the President
promptly introduced a law known as Law 1 of 1897, which empowered him
to exact assurances from the judges that they would respect all
resolutions of the Volksraad as having the force of law and declare
themselves not entitled to test the validity of a law by its
agreement or conflict with the Constitution; and it further empowered
the President in the event of his not being satisfied with the
character of the replies to summarily dismiss the judges. The judges
protested in a body that they would not submit to such treatment. The
High Court was adjourned and all legal business was stopped.
Particularly emphatic was Mr. Justice Gregorowski. He stated that
no honourable man could possibly sit upon the Transvaal Bench as long
as Law 1 of 1897 remained upon the Statute Book. At this juncture Sir
Henry de Villiers, Chief Justice of Cape Colony, came to Pretoria for
the purpose of effecting a compromise and averting a crisis. The
compromise was practically an armistice. The judges promised not to
exercise the testing right pending the speedy introduction of a
measure safeguarding the independence of the courts. Mr. Kruger on
his side promised to refrain from enforcing the provisions of Law 1
of 1897, and undertook to introduce as speedily as possible the
required new law.
The position in which the President found himself was undoubtedly one
of some difficulty, but he chose a very bad way out of it.
High-handed arbitrary methods cannot effect a permanent and
satisfactory solution of a question of that character, but Mr. Kruger
was unwilling to go to the root of the evil and to admit what Mr.
Kotzé's judgment had brought home with perhaps too sudden force,
namely, that the laws and system of Government were in a condition of
complete chaos. The sequel can be told in a few words. In February,
1898, Mr. Kotzé considered that ample time had been allowed by him
for the fulfilment of President Kruger's promise. Sir Henry de
Villiers thought it proper to allow more time. The point of
difference between Mr. Kotzé and Sir Henry de Villiers was the
interpretation to be placed upon the expression 'this session,' which
had been used in the previous February when the President had said
that if he did not introduce the proposed measures this session, the
judges might consider that he had failed to keep his promise. Mr.
Kotzé contended that as the Raad was then in session it meant _that
Session_, and that in any case that session and another had passed,
and a third was in progress and there was still no sign of the
promised measures. Sir Henry de Villiers stated that in his opinion
the reasonable construction would be that Mr. Kruger meant the
following _ordinary_ session, and that only ordinary sessions could
be considered (for in each year there are one special and one
ordinary session), so that the President might be entitled to claim
the whole of the year 1898 within which to fulfil his promise, but
that this would be the extreme limit of forbearance, after which
failure could only be regarded as a breach of faith. Sir Henry de
Villiers in fact defended Mr. Kruger. Mr. Kotzé, however, held to his
opinion; he wrote to the President reminding him of the undertaking,
charged him with failure to keep his promise and withdrew the pledge
which he had given. The President promptly exercised his right under
Law 1 of 1897, and dismissed Mr. Kotzé, who had served the country as
judge and chief justice for over twenty years. Whatever the merits of
the particular case may be it appeared to be a shocking exhibition
of arbitrary power to dismiss without compensation, pension, or
provision of any sort, a man no longer young, whose services had been
given for nearly a quarter of a century, who in the extreme dilemma
of the Raid had stood by the President, and who, from some points of
view, must be admitted to have served him 'not wisely but too well.'
Mr. Kotzé was not at that time popular among the Uitlanders on
account of his action in the matter of the Reformers, and especially
because he had acted on behalf of the Government in securing the
services of Mr. Gregorowski for the Reform trial; but the
circumstances of his dismissal and the fact that he was known to be
dependent upon his salary as judge, taken in conjunction with the
courageous stand which he had made against the President's arbitrary
will, enlisted public sympathy on his behalf, and a purse amounting
in all to about £6,000 was presented to him as a mark of appreciation
for his past services. But then followed the 'most unkindest cut of
all.' Mr. Gregorowski, who had resigned a judgeship in order to fill
the post of State Attorney when Dr. Coster, in consequence of an
insulting reference of the President's to his countrymen,
relinquished it,--Mr. Gregorowski, who had been foremost to declare
that no honourable man could possibly accept the position of judge
while Law 1 of 1897 stood on the Statute Book, became Chief Justice
_vice_ Mr. Kotzé dismissed. And by way of finally disposing of the
subject, the President when questioned in the Raad as to the
explanation of his apologist, denied that he had ever made any
promise of any sort or description to Sir Henry de Villiers or
anybody else!
Mr. Justice Ameshof, who with Mr. Kotzé had made a stand against the
President in this matter, was also obliged to relinquish his
judgeship. Thus it will be seen that at one swoop Mr. Kruger disposed
of three reputable intermediaries whom he had used to great advantage
at one time or another. 'Something for nothing,' for Mr. Kruger!
Whether Mr. Kotzé acted in haste or whether Sir Henry de Villiers'
plea for more time was justified are questions which it is no longer
necessary to discuss, not alone because Mr. Kruger denied ever having
made the promise out of which the disagreement arose, but because
even up to the present time no measure safeguarding the High Court
has been introduced or foreshadowed in the legislature. And Law 1 of
1897, which according to Mr. Gregorowski made it impossible for any
honourable man to sit upon the Bench, is still upon the Statute Book
and Mr. Gregorowski sits as Chief Justice subject to its provisions.
No one disputes that the position of the High Court as determined by
Law 1 of 1897 is a very unsatisfactory one, but the apologists for
President Kruger frequently say that there has been no actual case of
hardship, and that the Uitlanders are crying out before they are
hurt. They maintain that it was a measure passed under great
provocation for a particular purpose, and that the power granted
under it, although very undesirable in principle, has never been
used. This is incorrect; the power has been used, and injustice has
been suffered. Two cases of actual hardship are those of Brown _v._
Government, the case out of which the whole matter arose, and the
case of the Pretoria Waterworks Company. But there are other cases
too which have never been brought into court having been either
compromised or abandoned because of the hopelessness of the position,
for it is obvious that there would be great reluctance on the part of
business men to make a fight merely for the purpose of showing that
they suffered under a disability when the result of such a fight
would inevitably be to antagonize the only tribunal to which they
could appeal.
The case of the Pretoria Waterworks Company is rather a bad one. The
Government in 1889 gave a contract for the water supply of Pretoria.
It was a permission, but not an exclusive right, to supply the
town from springs on Government ground. The President, finding that
the contractor was not in a position to undertake the work, requested
certain business houses to form a company to acquire this right and
to supply the town with water. After inquiry into the local
conditions and the probable costs, these people represented that
unless they received the exclusive right they would be unable to
undertake the work, as the cost of importing pipes and machinery
transported from Natal by bullock waggon and the then expensive
conditions of working would make the work so costly that at a later
period, after the introduction of railways, it would be possible for
competitors, such for instance as the projected Municipality of
Pretoria, to establish a system of water supply at probably half the
cost of the first one and thus compete to their disadvantage. For
these reasons the contractor and his friends declined to proceed with
the formation of the company. The President, however, was very
desirous of having a good water supply, and after some months of
negotiations the original contract was supplemented by a grant from
the Executive Council, who then held plenary powers from the
Volksraad, giving the proposed company the exclusive right.
Immediately after the receipt of this grant the company was formed,
the capital subscribed and the machinery and other material
purchased. In 1898, after nine years of work, during which
shareholders had received dividends averaging 2-2/3 per cent. per
annum, some differences occurred between the Company and the
consumers, and the latter combined and subscribed the necessary funds
to take action in the High Court, the object being to challenge the
exclusive right and to enable the town through its Municipality to
provide its own supply. At the same time the Government at the
instance of the townspeople opened negotiations with the Company with
a view to expropriation in accordance with the terms stipulated in
the original contract. While matters were in this position, however,
certain members of the Volksraad prominently concerned in the action
against the Company, introduced a measure in the Volksraad cancelling
the second or exclusive grant made by the Government nine years
before and recommending that the Government should either buy out
the Waterworks Company upon suitable terms or should give the
necessary facilities to the Town Council to introduce another system
of supply. The application of the Company to be allowed to state its
case was ignored, and after a short discussion the resolution was
passed and the measure became law. By the action of the Volksraad the
Company was deprived of that principal asset upon the security of
which the capital had been subscribed, and the Government were
rescued from an awkward position. The Government took no steps to
defend their action in granting the right or to protest against the
action of the Volksraad, and became, therefore, parties to an act of
piracy. The Company were thus placed entirely at the mercy of the
Government, for under the provisions of Law 1 of 1897, the Volksraad
resolution put them out of court both as to upholding their title and
claiming damages. All doubts as to the Government's complicity in
this action were removed when upon negotiations being opened for the
expropriation of the Company the Government refused to follow the
procedure prescribed in the contract on the ground that as the
Company had now lost the exclusive right they must accept a less sum
in compensation, otherwise the Government would authorise the rival
Municipal scheme. Under these circumstances the shareholders having
no other power to appeal to adopted the common-sense course of taking
what they could get. The result can only be expressed in figures. The
shares, which had been purchased at over 40s. at the time of the
Volksraad's action were worth less than 28s. in liquidation. The
inquiry into the Raid by the Select Committee of the House of
Commons, early in 1897, was productive of a result which is not
always traced to its real cause. The greatest dissatisfaction was
expressed in the Transvaal and among all the Boers in South Africa
with one feature of the Westminster inquiry, viz., the investigation
of the causes which made the Raid possible. Mr. Kruger and his
friends had enjoyed such a run of luck and so much indulgence, and
had been so successful in presenting their side of the case only,
that it seemed to them improper that anyone should wish to inquire
into all the circumstances. It would even appear from what
followed that the President had convinced himself that there were no
grievances, that he was an entirely innocent party deeply injured by
the Reformers and the British Government, and that the Westminster
inquiry had been authorized and conducted for the sole purpose of
exposing him and justifying the Reform movement.
As the months dragged on and no improvement in the conditions of the
Uitlanders took place, as indeed the complaints grew louder and the
state of affairs grew worse, the President again began to hear the
voices calling for reform. Timid whispers they were, perhaps, and far
between, for the great bulk of the Uitlanders were in a morose and
sullen mood. Having tried and failed on stronger lines they were
incapable as yet of returning with any heart to the old fruitless and
already rejected constitutional methods. The suggestions for reform,
consequently, came principally from those who were on friendly terms
with the Boer party and believed themselves to carry some weight.
They have by this time learned that nobody carries weight with
President Kruger unless he has power to back his suggestions. Many
years before, the late Mr. W.Y. Campbell as spokesman of a deputation
from Johannesburg, addressing President Kruger, stated in the course
of his remarks that the people of Johannesburg 'protested' against a
certain measure. The President jumped up in one of his characteristic
moods and said: 'Protest! Protest!! what is the good of protesting?
You have not got the guns! I have.' And Mr. Campbell, in reporting
this in Johannesburg, remarked: 'That man is sensible; he knows the
position. I claim to be sensible also, and I know he is right: you
can take my name off any other deputations, for we'll get nothing by
asking.'
It is stated, and the statement comes from one who claims to have
been the father of the suggestion, that the President was induced to
appoint a commission of inquiry by the argument that if, as he
believed, the wretched state of affairs in Johannesburg was due not
to the action of the Government but to the greed, machinations, and
mismanagement of the capitalists, nothing could suit the latter worse
than to be taken at their word and to have a commission appointed to
take evidence on oath and to publicly inquire into the state of
affairs; in fact to copy the Westminster inquiry. It is
conceivable that the resolute refusal to investigate matters or to
listen to complaints or explanations which the President had
throughout maintained may have been the means of preserving a
blissful faith in the strength of his own case and the rottenness of
the Uitlanders'; at any rate, it seems to be an undoubted fact that
the Industrial Commission of Inquiry, which was appointed by the
Executive at the request of the President, was appointed in the
confident belief that it would shift the burden of responsibility
from his shoulders to those of the capitalists. This construction of
his motives may appear to be severe and perhaps even unfair, but it
is entirely borne out by the manner in which he dealt with the report
of the Industrial Commission, fighting against its acceptance,
ignoring the recommendations of relief, and even imposing fresh
burdens. There is, nevertheless, one thing to be deduced which is in
a manner to Mr. Kruger's credit, and that is that he really must have
believed that the case would--from his point of view--bear inquiring
into.
The members of the Commission with power to vote were Messrs. Schalk
W. Burger, Member of the Executive Council (Chairman); J.S. Smit,
Government Railway Commissioner; Christiaan Joubert, Minister of
Mines; Schmitz-Dumont, Acting State Mining Engineer; and J.F. de
Beer, first special Judicial Commissioner, Johannesburg. Mr. Thos.
Hugo, the General Manager of the National Bank, was appointed
financial adviser, and certain advisory members were arbitrarily
selected by the Government. The complete exclusion of all those who
had had any direct or indirect association with the late Reform
movement or with those in any way connected with it strengthened the
conviction that the Government designed the Commission to be a
whitewashing one; but whatever the design may have been it would be
doing an injustice both to the Government officials and to the
advisory members to have it supposed that they were parties to such
an idea. They were not; they did their work admirably, and no inquiry
could have been conducted in a better spirit. This, however, was not
foreseen, and it was with the greatest difficulty that the Uitlanders
were induced to view the thing seriously and to realize that, no
matter how it had occurred, this was a supreme opportunity for
proving to the world the soundness of their case. The report and
proceedings are published by the Witwatersrand Chamber of Mines in a
volume containing over 700 pages of printed matter and a number of
diagrams. The whole constitutes a damning indictment of the
Government, as the following extracts from the report of the
Commission testify:--
Your Commission are pleased to state that at present there exist all
the indications of an honest administration, and the State, as well
as the Mining Industry, must be congratulated upon the fact that most
of the mines are controlled and directed by financial and practical
men who devote their time, energy, and knowledge to the mining
industry, and who have not only introduced the most up-to-date
machinery and mining appliances, but also the greatest perfection of
method and process known to science. But for these a good many of the
mines now producing gold would not have reached that stage....
To avoid such a calamity (viz., the closing down of the mines) your
Commission are of opinion that it is the duty of the Government to
co-operate with the mining industry, and to devise means in order to
make it possible for lower-grade mines to work at a profit, and
generally to lighten the burdens of the mining industry. This and the
development and equipment of the new mines are a few examples among
others where it is desirable that the Government shall take an active
part, especially 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.
The question, therefore, becomes one of national economy, and it is
incumbent upon the Government, considering the rapid growth and
progress of the country, to so alter its fiscal laws and systems of
administration as to meet the requirements of its principal
industry....