IT is vain to dispute the fact that those Puritan Fathers—who, upon one
occasion, held a meeting, and resolved first that the earth was the
Lord’s, and the fulness thereof; secondly, that it was the heritage of
the saints; and that thirdly, they were the saints, and were, therefore,
justified in depriving the natives of their grounds, and in taking
possession of them themselves—had a full share of that English faculty of
appropriation which has made England the mistress of the seas, and for a
while, almost, the ruler of the world; and, as Englishmen, we cannot say
that on the whole that wholesale system, which has planted the British
flag in every quarter of the globe, has been disastrous to the
communities ruled over, or dishonourable to the nation itself. In some
cases undoubtedly we have acted unjustly; in some cases the lives and
happiness of millions have been placed in incompetent hands; in some
cases we have had selfish rulers and incapable officers; but India and
Canada and the West Indian Islands and Australia and New Zealand are the
better for our rule. An Englishman may well be proud of what his
countrymen have done, and it becomes us to review the past in no narrow,
carping, and censorious spirit. We have spent money by millions, but
then we are rich, and the expenditure has not been an unproductive one.
We have sacrificed valuable lives, but the men who have fallen have been
embalmed in the nation’s memory, and the story of their heroism will
mould the character and fire the ambition and arouse the sympathies of
our children’s children, as they did those of our fathers in days gone
by; and yet there is a danger lest we undertake responsibilities beyond
our means, and find ourselves engaged in contests utterly needless in the
circumstances of the case, and certain to result in a vain effusion of
blood and expenditure of money. As far as South Africa is concerned,
this is emphatically the case. Originally the Cape Settlement was but a
fort for the the coast. The country is subject to drought, and seems
chiefly to be inhabited by diamond diggers, ostrich farmers, and wool
growers. Its great agricultural resources are undeveloped, because
labour is dear, and all carriage to the coast is expensive. The English
never stop in the colonies, but return to England as soon as they have
made a fortune. Living is quite as dear as in England, and in many parts
dearer. In the Cape Colony, the chief amusements of all classes are
riding, driving, shooting, and billiards. In the interior there are fine
views to be seen, and in some quarters an abundance of game. The
thunderstorms are frightful, the rivers, dry in summer, are torrents in
winter. The droughts, the snakes, the red soil dust, and the Kaffirs,
are a perpetual nuisance to all decent people. “Although South Africa is
a rising colony,” writes Sir Arthur Cunynghame, “I hardly think it offers
to the emigrant the chances which he would obtain in Australia or New
Zealand. South Africa is not a very rich country. Labour is hard to
obtain, and it will be years before irrigation can be carried on a
sufficient scale to make agriculture a brilliant Success. Nevertheless,
land is so abundant that the energetic colonist is sure, at least, to
make a living, and provided he does not drink, has a good chance of
becoming a rich man.” A great deal of money is made by ostrich farming
and sheep grazing, but they are occupations which require capital. As to
cereals, it pays better to buy them than to grow them. A cabbage appears
to be a costly luxury, and the price of butter is almost prohibitive.
“South Africa,” wrote a _Saturday Reviewer_ recently, “is the paradise of
hunters, and the purgatory of colonists.” The remark is not exactly
true, but for all practical purposes it may be accepted as the truth. If
this be so, how is it, then, it may be asked, we English have been so
anxious to get possession of the country? The answer is, We hold the
Cape of Good Hope to be desirable as a port of call and harbour of refuge
on our way to India; but the opening of the Suez Canal has changed all
that, and the reason for which we took it from the Dutch in 1806 does not
exist now. Whether the country has ever made a penny by the Cape remains
to be proved.
In taking possession of the Cape of Good Hope, we found there a people
whom we have annexed against their will, and of whom we have made bitter
enemies. These were the original Dutch settlers, or Boers, a primitive,
pastoral people, with a good deal of the piety of the Pilgrim Fathers,
and who set to work to exterminate the pagans much after the fashion of
the Jews, of whom we read in the Old Testament. Their plan of getting
rid of the native difficulty was a very effective one. They either made
the native a slave, or they drove him away. Mr. Thomas Pringle, one of
our earliest colonists, says, “Their demeanour towards us, whom they
might be supposed naturally to regard with exceeding jealousy, if not
dislike, was more friendly and obliging than could, under all the
circumstances, have been expected.” They were, he says, uncultivated,
but not disagreeable, neighbours, exceedingly shrewd at bargain making;
but they were civil and good-natured, and, according to the custom of the
country, extremely hospitable; and the same testimony has been borne to
them by later travellers. They lived as farmers, and the life agreed
with them. The men are finely made, and out of them a grand empire might
be raised. In 1815 they made an effort to shake off the British yoke. A
Hottentot, named Booy, appeared at the magistrate’s office at Cradock,
and complained of the oppressive conduct of a Boer of the name of
Frederick Bezuidenhout. Inquiry was accordingly made. The Boer admitted
the facts, but, instead of yielding to the magistrate’s order, he boldly
declared that he considered this interference between himself and his
Hottentot to be a presumptuous innovation upon his rights, and an
intolerable usurpation of authority. He told the field-cornet that he
set at defiance both himself and the magistrate who had sent him on this
officious errand, and, to give further emphasis to his words, he fell
violently upon poor Boor, gave him a severe beating, and then bade him go
and tell the civil authorities that he would treat them in the same
manner if they should dare to come upon his grounds to claim the property
of a Hottentot. It must be remembered that when the Boers were handed
over to us, without their leave or without their consent being in any way
asked, each Boer had perfect control over the liberty and life and limb
of every Hottentot under his control. It was only thus he believed his
property was safe, and his throat uncut. But to return to Bezuidenhout.
The Cape Government could not allow his defiance to pass unheeded. An
expedition was sent out against him, and he was shot. The affair excited
a great sensation in the country. At a numerous assemblage of the Boers
in the neighbourhood, it was resolved to revenge his death. They did
more; they resolved to be independent of the hateful British yoke; but,
it is needless to add, in vain. England, after putting down Napoleon,
and triumphing at Waterloo, was in no mood to be defied by a handful of
Dutch farmers in a distant quarter of the globe. But the Cape Government
had Kaffir wars to fight, and they could not afford to treat the Boers as
absolute enemies, and they were rewarded with a large portion of the
territory, won from the Kaffirs in 1819. But this was not sufficient for
their earth-hunger. They crossed the boundaries, and, with their lives
in their hands, planted themselves among the savages. In 1838 they went
off still further from British rule. In that year the slaves were
manumitted, and a sum of money was voted as a compensation to the Boers.
To the shame of the British Government, it must be confessed that the
equivalent was never paid them. Despairing of ever receiving it, they
sold their rights to Jews and middlemen, and trekked far out into the
country into the districts known as Griqualand, Natal, the Orange Free
State, and the Transvaal. It is because we have followed them there,
when there was no need to have done so, that we are now engaged in a
costly and bloody war. First we seized Natal; then we took possession of
the Diamond Fields, and our last act was the annexation of the Transvaal.
How far this system of annexation is to spread, it is impossible to say.
It is equally impossible to state what will be its cost in treasure and
in men. It seems equally difficult to say upon whom the blame of this
annexation system rests. It really seems as if we were villains, as
Shakespeare says, by necessity and fools by a divine thrusting on. We
should have left the Boers alone. They were not British subjects, and
did not want to be such. Natal was not British territory when they
settled there, neither was the Orange Free State Territory; and, at any
rate, in 1854 their independence, which had been persistently fought for,
and nobly won, was acknowledged by the British Government as regards the
Orange Free State and the Transvaal. Surely in South Africa there was
room for the Englishman and the Boer, and if it had not been for the
dream of Imperialism, which seems to dominate the brain of our colonial
rulers, the two nations might have lived and flourished side by side.
The Boer, at any rate, has made himself at home on the soil. It agrees
with him physically. In the Orange State and the Transvaal he made good
roads, and built churches and schools and gaols, and turned the
wilderness into a fruitful field. In reply to the English who pleaded
for annexation, he said, “We fled from you years ago; leave us in peace.
We shall pay our debts early enough; your presence can but tend to
increase them, and to drive us through fresh wanderings, through new
years of bloodshed and misery, to seek homes whither you will no longer
follow us. We conquered and peopled Natal; you reaped the fruits of that
conquest. What have you done for that colony? Do you seek to do with
our Transvaal as you have done with it, to make our land a place of
abomination, defiled with female slavery, reeking with paganism, and
likely, as Natal is, only too soon to be red with blood?”
“The Transvaal,” wrote one who knew South Africa well—the late Mr. Thomas
Baines—“will yet command the admiration of the world for the
perseverance, the primitive manliness and hardihood of its pioneers.” As
a proof of advancing prosperity, when he was there in 1860 its one-pound
notes had risen in value till four were taken for a sovereign, and
several hundred pounds’ worth had been called in and publicly burnt upon
the market-place. It is a proof of the simplicity of the people that on
that occasion the Boers and Doppers (adult Baptists) crowded wrathfully
around, and bitterly commented on the wastefulness of their Government in
wickedly destroying so much of the money of their Republic; while others,
of more advanced views, discussed the means of raising them still further
in value, and sagely remarked that because they had been printed in
Holland the English would not take them, but that if others were printed
in London they would certainly be as good as a Bank of England note. In
the Volksraad (House of Commons) now and then some amusing scenes
occurred. The progressive party wanted, one day, to pass some measure
for the opening and improvement of the country, when the opponents,
finding themselves in a minority, thought to put the drag on by bringing
forward an old law that all members should be attired in black cloth
suits and white neckerchiefs. This had the immediate effect of
disqualifying so many that the business of the House could not be legally
conducted; but an English member who lived next door, slipped out, donned
his Sunday best, with a collar and tie worthy of a Christy Minstrel, and
resumed his sitting with an army that completely dismayed the
anti-progressionists. The latest authority, Sir Arthur Cunynghame,
testifies to this simplicity as still the characteristic of the Dutch.
“Some little time before our arrival,” he writes, “a German conjurer had
visited this distant little village, when the Doppers were so alarmed at
his tricks that they left the room in which he was exhibiting, and,
assembling in prayer, entreated to be relieved of the devil who had come
amongst them.” He tells the story of a Jew, who in dealing with a Boer
had made a miscalculation, which the Boer pointed out, appealing to his
ready-reckoner. Not in the least taken aback, the Israelite replied,
“Oh, this is a ready-reckoner of last year!” and the poor Boer was done.
A further illustration of their simplicity is to be found in the fact
that when they trekked from the Cape they fancied that they were on their
way to Egypt, and, having reached in the Transvaal a considerable river
which falls into the Limpopo, thought they were there, and called it the
Nyl—a name which it still retains. In accordance with their serious
teaching, they gave Scriptural names to their settlements and villages;
and if they were severe on the natives, and ruled them with a rod of
iron, did not the Jews act in a similar manner to the Hivites and the
Hittites, and did not Samuel command Saul to hew Agag in pieces before
the Lord?
It is to be feared that the Boers have never had justice done to them by
our rulers. We had no claim on them. It was to escape British rule that
they, with their wives and children, their men-servants and
maid-servants, their oxen, and their sheep, their horses and their asses,
went forth into the wilderness. Even Mr. Trollope admits that when they
took possession of Natal, “there was hardly a native to be seen, the
country having been desolated by the King of the Zulus. It was the very
place for the Dutch, fertile without interference, and with space for
every one.” There they would have settled, as did the Pilgrim Fathers on
the other side of the Atlantic, and built up a flourishing State, but we
followed them, and drove them away. If they had been allowed to remain,
the English Government and the English people would have been saved a
good deal of trouble. At any rate, we should never have heard of the
native difficulty in Natal—the difficulty which keeps away the emigration
required to develop the resources of a country happily situated in many
respects; the difficulty which must ever be felt by a handful of English
in the presence of a horde of polygamous and untutored savages who will
not work, and who, alas! are not ashamed to beg. Natal, had the Dutch
been left peaceably in possession of it, would have been by this time the
home of a God-fearing, civilised community, instead of swarming with
Pagans who have fled there from the cruelties of their native kings, and
who learn to treat their protectors with insolent contempt. In Natal,
the English shopkeeper has to speak to his customers in their own
language. Where the Boers hold sway it is otherwise. In the Dutch parts
of the Cape Colony, Captain Aylward writes: “The coloured people are
tame, submissive, and industrious, speaking the language of their
instructors and natural masters. As I proceeded further on my journey
through the Transvaal,” continues the same writer, “I saw in various
directions gardens, fruitful orchards, and small, square houses in the
possession of blacks, who were living in a condition of ordinary
propriety, having abandoned polygamy and other horrid customs resulting
from it. So great an improvement I had not noticed during any part of my
previous residence in Natal.” It is a pity that we have made the Boers
our enemies; and the worst of it is, in their determination not to be
English the women, according to Captain Aylward, have been a wonderful
aid to the men. They have suffered for that spirit. It has called them
from the homesteads built by their fathers, the rich lands where the
grapes clustered and the sheep fattened, and the fields were white for
the harvest. In 1841 Major Charteris wrote: “The spirit of dislike to
English rule was remarkably dominant among the women. Many of those who
had formerly lived in affluence but were now in comparative want, and
subject to all the inconveniences accompanying the insecure state in
which they were existing, having lost, moreover, their husbands and
brothers by the savage, still rejected with scorn the idea of returning
to the colony. If any of the men began to drop or lose courage they
urged them on to fresh exertions, and kept alive the spirit of resistance
within them.” Sir Arthur Cunynghame has nothing but praise for the
Boers. On his way to the Diamond Fields he stopped at Hanover, which, he
says, “has a grand appearance, the Dutch minister’s house, standing in
the centre, being quite a palace. It was built by the subscriptions of
his parishioners. The honours which the Dutch lavish on the ministry are
worthy of remark.” Equally worthy of remark is their hospitality and
their piety. The farmer gives his guest the best entertainment he can
provide, and “before the family retires to rest the large Bible is opened
and the chapter appropriate to the day is read.” On another occasion,
Sir Arthur’s party encamp near the residence of a rich Dutch farmer, who
refused admission to his house and would not even sell them an egg; yet
he records the fact that, “late in the evening the sounds of the Evening
Hymn floated over the plain, the nasal twang of the patriarch being
distinctly heard leading the choir, while female voices, with their
plaintive notes, chimed in. It is pleasant,” adds Sir Arthur, “to hear
in these lone lands such evidence of a religions sentiment pervading the
community, and it is an assurance that the people are contented and
happy.” Sir Arthur writes:—“There are no finer young men in the world
than the young Dutch Boers, who are generally of immense height and size,
and very hardy. Their life is spent in the open air by day, and
frequently at night they sleep on the veldt, with no tent or covering.
Men more fit for the Grenadier Guards, as to personal appearance, could
not be found. Some of them are plucky. A Boer had part of his hand
blown off by the bursting of his gun. Having no doctor near, he directed
his son to bring his hammer and chisel, and shape off his fingers.” As
an Irishman, Captain Aylward is enthusiastic as regards the personal
charms of the ladies. Many of the elder ones even, he admits, are not
uncomely, and in the wild neighbourhood of Lydenberg itself, he tells us,
are to be seen some bearing traces of beauty of no ordinary character,
whose lives, he says, somewhat unnecessarily, are useful, adorning, and
cheering the homes of their husbands and children. These people are
somewhat unlettered, and very phlegmatic. “They do not wish,” writes Sir
Arthur Cunynghame, “to move ten miles from their own door, nor to see one
who comes from ten miles beyond it.” Their moral discipline also seems
somewhat severe. “In the little fort,” writes Captain Aylward, “was an
English storekeeper, named Glynn, whose daughters had a piano, on which
they would occasionally play dance and other profane music. This was a
source of great annoyance to their pious neighbours, who, in many
respects, resembled our early Puritans. It was requested that the piano
should be silenced, as the music might tempt the anger of Heaven if
persisted in during a time of war and trial. If a girl in the laager
were frivolous or light in her conduct, she was liable to be arrested,
and brought for trial before the Fathers of the Church, from whom she
might receive a severe caution, or even the punishment of removal.” At
Lydenberg, at the time of Sir Arthur’s visit, an altercation had taken
place on the unrighteousness of dancing, for which a party was tried by
the Synod; but an appeal was made to the Court, and this appeal formed an
important epoch in the history of the town. To show how primitive these
Boers are, let us take the following story:—A schoolmaster was lately
appointed in Zoutspanberg. One of his earliest lessons was to teach the
children that the world turned upon its own axis. He also endeavoured to
make them understand the revolutions of the heavenly bodies. The
children went home, and were impertinent to their parents, and told them
that the earth went round the sun. The elders of the district met, and
consulted regarding these new doctrines, and finally agreed to refer the
subject to the minister, who requested the schoolmaster to explain. The
schoolmaster said, “I teach them nothing but the movements of the
heavenly bodies, and that the earth revolves round the sun.” The
minister answered, “Well, this may be true, no doubt, and what the earth
does in Holland; but it would be more convenient at present if in the
Zoutspanberg you would allow the sun still to go round the earth for a
few years longer. We do not like sudden changes in such matters.” The
schoolmaster took the hint, and the sun continued to go round the earth
as usual. The power of the minister of a parish is very great. A great
deal depends upon him for the improvement and well-being of the town.
Many a time it was said to Sir Arthur, when he observed that a town was
flourishing, “Yes, we are fortunate in our minister;” and when it was
falling back it was, “Ah! all will alter when we get rid of our present
minister.”
It is to the credit of these people that they have a consistent native
policy. No faith is to be held with Rome. “Delenda est Carthago” is
their motto. They leave the natives to quarrel among themselves, while
our English policy has been to play off one petty savage chief against
another, and to arm and strengthen the natives with whom we are
ultimately to fight. The natives see through this, and argue, as Sir
Arthur Cunynghame testifies, that the English fear them, else why, they
ask, do they give them such high wages? or why do the Government allow
them to buy arms? It is some such feeling that has urged on Cetewayo
into his present hostile attitude. He considered that we were his allies
against the Boers, and thought we annexed the Transvaal for him and his
savage followers. Up to the annexation he and the English were on
friendly terms. It seems that the Boers are reluctant to fight for
English rule, and some of the colonial papers hint that they are a danger
and a menace. No wonder, as we have always sacrificed them to the
natives. The Free States newspaper complains that “our British
neighbours have established at the Diamond Fields free trade in guns and
ammunition, in spite of all treaties with the Republic, and even in spite
of their own professed policy in the Cape Colony. Griqualand West
permits the supply of guns and ammunition to the natives—Zulus and
Basutos—without hindrance, whilst Earl Carnarvon requests all South
Africa to meet in a friendly conference, because of the native question
and Zulu difficulty. British traders supply Her Majesty’s enemies, and
our enemies too, with guns and ammunition to any extent, in order that
these enemies may be better prepared to fight us when the next struggle
may commence; and, worst of all, British commerce, represented by
colonial shopkeepers and merchants, who, to fill their own pockets, would
not for a moment hesitate to bring ruin on the colonial farmers and
Republican Boers, cry out that it is preposterous to stop the trade in
guns.” Assuredly, the Boers may well complain of the Imperial policy in
South Africa. There is little to be said for our dealings with them
after they had removed out of our rule. That we had no right to annex
the Diamond Fields, the sum we offered in compensation may be considered
as fair evidence; and the annexation of the Transvaal, besides being a
crime, was a blunder for which we are now paying dearly in person and in
purse. It has bean shown that the cry for annexation raised was merely
“an ignorant expression of the dissatisfaction of a mean and contemptible
minority”—a set of greedy speculators and disreputable office-seekers,
who grossly deceived the English officials, who were not naturally averse
to the power and prestige a new command would give them. The Republic
was not insolvent, nor was it unable to hold its own. In the war with
the Basutos, contrary to the assertion of Mr. Trollope, the Burghers were
everywhere victorious, nor was it stained with slavery, as, if so, when
Sir Theophilus Shepstone annexed it, we should have heard of a wholesale
emancipation; nor was the step taken by the will of the people. The only
argument for the step was that we were obliged to take it in order to
prevent our own house catching fire, and the result has been the
conflagration we were so anxious to avoid. Sir Theophilus Shepstone
annexed the Transvaal, and our house caught fire in the Cape Colony, and
in Griqualand West, and Secocoeni broke out; and, lastly, we have the
tragedy of Isandula. We shall never be safe till we have the Transvaal,
argued Sir Theophilus Shepstone and his friends. Now, argue the latter,
that we have the Transvaal, we are bound to go to war. This reasoning
was irresistible to Lord Chelmsford, who, in a despatch dated September
last, says, “So long as Natal and the Transvaal had separate interests,
the policy of the chief of the Zulu nation was to play off the former
against the latter. . . . With the annexation of the Transvaal this
state of things virtually came to an end.”
_Ex uno disce omnes_. One example will suffice of the way in which that
theory of dominion universal, from, the Cape to the Zambesi, which
appears to dominate over the official Englishman, when he has anything to
do with Africa, acts in a mischievous manner, may be seen in the case of
Griqualand East, formerly called No Man’s Land, which was some years
since a sort of neutral territory. In time the Griquas, or bastards,
settled there. They were an industrious people, and far more advanced in
civilisation than any other native tribe. They had large flocks of
cattle and sheep, and were wealthy, with good furniture and houses, and
prospered under the rule of their President, Adam Kok. Many new
buildings, such as churches and schools, were being erected when Sir
Arthur Cunynghame visited them, and many new stores put up. He writes:
“In the afternoon we attended the native service carried on in the Dutch
language. It was impossible for me to follow it; in fact, the discovery
that the sermon related to the Prodigal Son formed the limit of my
knowledge of what was going on. The congregation appeared attentive, and
the clergyman in earnest.” Not long after the visit, it was decided by
the British that they should annex the country, and Adam Kok was
pensioned off with a thousand a year, which he did not, however, long
enjoy, as he was soon killed by a carriage accident. At a meeting of the
people on the subject, Captain Adam Kok complained, as, indeed, he had
every reason to do, of the hasty and arbitrary manner in which Government
were assuming authority in his country. They had their own cannon,
fire-arms, and ammunition, bought with their own money, and after being
left for thirteen years entirely to their own resources, without any
preliminary notice he said, the Cape Government stepped coolly in and
took possession of them and their property. When the Government laid out
the Kat River Settlement of Hottentots, they gave the settlers seed,
corn, ploughs, and various other things to help them. But the Griquas
were not so treated. They had to do everything for themselves, and we
were bound to regard them not as enemies to be put down, but as friendly
allies to be encouraged and preserved.
How long is this system to be pursued? The Transvaal is getting into a
worse state every day. It has vast resources which cannot be developed.
It is importing flour, when it might be a great corn-producing country.
It has no manufactures, and its exports are few. Captain Aylward writes:
“The Boer party complain bitterly of the annexation. They say our
liberties have been unnecessarily taken from us, and our country annexed,
not only against the will of the majority, but in utter defiance of Lord
Carnarvon’s instructions, which state that no such proclamation shall be
issued by you (Sir Theophilus Shepstone), unless you shall be certain
that the inhabitants, or a sufficient number of them, or the Legislature,
desire to become our subjects.” The Boers also object to the annexation,
because they believe that the arguments put forward by Sir Theophilus
Shepstone are not borne out by facts, and they are still more angry
because they believe the annexation was brought about by false pretences,
accompanied and strengthened by attacks made upon their honour and
character by a party Press interested in their destruction. They say
further, that the terms of the Annexation Proclamation have not been
adhered to, and this party, undoubtedly the strongest in the country,
appeals to England to do them justice and restore to them their country.
The railway party who want a connection with the natural outlet of the
Transvaal, Delagoa Bay, are discontented, and so are the very men who
were the first to applaud annexation. As it is, it seems, the Transvaal
must end either in anarchy or martial law, and will be a heavy burden on
the British taxpayer for many years to come. Mr. Trollops himself admits
that it is not easy to justify what we have done in the Transvaal. “If
there be,” he writes, “any laws of right and wrong, by which nations
should govern themselves in their dealings with other nations, it is hard
to find the law in conformity with which that act was done.” And Mr.
Trollope is right. Undoubtedly it was an act of injustice of which we
have not yet seen the bitter end. There is little chance of that
injustice being undone. The Dutch are poor and far away. It is the old,
old story of the wolf and the lamb over again. We have made so little of
South Africa, we might leave the Boers alone. All that we can say
against them is that when it was the fashion for West Indian planters to
maltreat their slaves, they often did the same.
The Boers are becoming more discontented, as well they may, and there is
no sign of this discontent ceasing. In the beginning of February they
held a large meeting at Wonderfontein to receive the report of the visit
of the deputation, Messrs. Kruger and Joubert, to Europe. The latter is
reported to have said:—“My brethren and fellow-countrymen,—I am very glad
to see you all spared by God in this our beloved country. I wish and
hope the best, also, with regard to your families. You have deputed us
on a mission of the utmost importance to yourselves. I know you are
awaiting our report with deep anxiety. I know your feelings and your
wishes—aye, I share your anxiety, and, therefore, _I_ will not detain you
long by words. Know, then, that I cannot report to you so favourably as
you had expected that the all-powerful British Empire had acknowledged
your rights so that you may, as had been said by Joshua to Caleb, be
strong and possess the country which God has given you. No, brethren,
England has annexed your country, and will keep it, and I may not mislead
you by not telling you that you cannot stop the superior power of
England. Therefore, take heed for yourselves, and don’t do anything of
which you may repent for ever, and which may plunge yourselves, your
families, and others into deeper misery still. Pray to God for wisdom;
be prudent, and act wisely. Who knows, God may help us and grant relief.
You had sent us to ask back your independence. What we have done for it
you already know from the newspapers, and the rest you will learn from
the books or pamphlets which we had printed. In how far you will decide
that we have done our duty we leave to you. I do not care for myself,
but I do for the country, and the people, and where I feel my own
shortcomings and weakness, I am satisfied before God and my conscience
that I, if _I_ have not obtained what you, what I, and the people have
desired, I have done for it what I could. And with this I wish God’s
greatest blessing for yourselves and the country.” Other speeches were
delivered of a more angry and exciting character. It was intimated that
we got our Empire by robbery. Mr. W. Pretorious said the High
Commissioner promised much, but all he wanted was to get back his
independence. Said another speaker, amidst enthusiastic cheers, England
might annex and oppress them, but it could never give them an English
heart. Some resolutions were moved, of which the following was one:—“The
committee, supported by the people, cannot be satisfied with the reply of
the English Minister, Sir Michael Hicks Beach, and resolve to continue to
protest against the injustice committed, and, further, to devise ways and
means with the people for attaining their object.” After the meeting,
some people having torn to pieces the printed copies of Sir Bartle
Frere’s letter, Mr. Joubert strongly condemned the stupid proceedings,
and requested the people to act wisely and with judgment. On the Sunday
religious services were held, and on Monday a further meeting took place.
Ultimately it was resolved, “That the committee, having learned the
opinion of the people expressed in their memorials, and the expressed
wish of the people not to submit to British supremacy, but to abide by
the protest of April 11, 1877, proposes to the committee a deputation to
acquaint Sir Bartle Frere therewith, and at the same time to assure His
Excellency of their full co-operation for the advancement of the whole of
South Africa, provided the annexation be rescinded.” Clearly, when we
have settled with Cetewayo, we shall have a little trouble with the free
people of the Transvaal. According to the _Natal Mercury_, we had better
leave them alone.
The following, says the _Natal Witness_, is a translation of the oath of
mutual allegiance taken by a great number of respectable Transvaal Boers
at the Wonderfontein meeting. It will strike most people that this oath
is the oath of men who are to be respected. It will also strike them
that such men are likely to secure the sympathy of the great bulk of the
English nation:—“In the presence of Almighty God, the Searcher of hearts,
and praying for His gracious assistance and mercy, we, burghers of the
South African Republic, have solemnly agreed, for us and for our
children, to unite in a holy covenant, which we confirm with a solemn
oath. It is now forty years ago since our fathers left the Cape Colony
to become a free and independent people. These forty years were forty
years of sorrow and suffering. We have founded Natal, the Orange Free
State, and the South African Republic, and three times has the English
Government trampled on our liberty. And our flag, baptized with the
blood and tears of our fathers, has been pulled down. As by a thief in
the night has our free Republic been stolen from us. We cannot suffer
this and we may not. It is the will of God that the unity of our fathers
and the love to our children should oblige us to deliver unto our
children, unblemished, the heritage of our fathers. It is for this
reason that we here unite, and give each other the hand as men and
brethren, solemnly promising to be faithful to our country and people,
and looking unto God, to work together unto death for the restoration of
the liberty of our Republic. So truly help us, God Almighty.”
Till Sir Bartle Frere appeared upon the scene at the Cape men ridiculed
the idea of another Kaffir war. Now all is changed. The following is an
extract from a letter, dated February 12, received by a gentleman in
London from a well-known merchant at the Cape:—“Who is responsible for
the fearful loss of life which has taken place in Zululand? This is now
the question of all questions; but we fear that it will drop out of
sight, as the iniquitous proceedings perpetrated here during the late
so-called war have done. The Zulus will, of course, be crushed, as
‘Might is Right’ seems now to be England’s motto. Sir Bartle Frere and
Lord Chelmsford must answer for the part they have played, and for the
consequences of the tragedy they have caused. Never was there a greater
mistake than the Frere-Sprigg native policy. We have not right on our
side, and we have not the force to carry it out, even if we had. We have
made enemies of the loyal Gaikas, of the Basutos, of the Fingoes, of the
Zulus, and of every other tribe in South Africa, by our harsh and unjust
treatment of them. The appointment of Sir Bartle Frere as Governor, and
of Mr. Sprigg and his party to power, are the greatest misfortunes which
have befallen this country for fifty years.”
The South African correspondent of the _Daily News_, writing from
Maritzburg, March 2, says:—“It is now only too evident to every one that
Sir Bartle Frere’s policy has been most mischievous in its effects upon
South African interests. More has been done since he landed at Capetown,
two years ago, to produce discord and unsettlement than, it is to be
feared, can be undone for many years to come. Friendly tribes have been
exasperated; colonists have been ridden over rough-shod, and now it would
seem that the High Commissioner is bent on bringing about the last and
final evil, by engaging in a war of conquest with the Transvaal Boers.
There is a strong and increasing feeling throughout South Africa that the
annexation of the Transvaal must be reversed. When that act took place
it met with very wide approval, for two reasons—first, because it was
believed that the majority of the Boers were consenting parties; and
next, because it was believed that the act might tend to bring the two
great European nationalities closer together. The return of the second
Transvaal deputation has brought to light the fact that the majority of
the Boers were by no means consenting parties. They complain, too, and
justly, that not one of the promises made at the time of the annexation
has been fulfilled. If the acts of the annexation were repealed, and
time allowed for the bitter feelings engendered by it to subside, there
is little doubt that the Boers would be found willing to come into some
sort of confederation with the other South African States, and there can
be no doubt that if the Transvaal came in willingly the Free State, whose
capital, Bloemfontein, is regarded by many as the natural capital of
South Africa, would come in also.”
What is to be the end of our system of annexation in South Africa? Our
Consuls far away from the healthy criticism of the English Press, and
possibly better trained in ancient than modern history, dream imperial
dreams, and the public at home applauds when a magnificent success crowns
their work. In the case of Sir Bartle Frere there has been a failure,
and he will have to pay the penalty; while demagogues who, like the
Irishman who when landed in America, and asked for his vote for the
opposition candidate, immediately promised it, remarking he was “again
all Government,” see in the failure the hand of Earl Beaconsfield, and
hold him up to scorn and contempt. It is clear what has been done at the
Cape is only in accordance with the whole past of colonial rule, not
merely there, but in every quarter of the globe. We could not leave the
Boers alone, who stood as buffers between us and the surrounding savages.
We must follow them over desert and plain and swamp and river and rock
and bush. The colonist reaped, at any rate, a benefit from such a
policy, for he made profitable contracts for his waggons and horses, and
there was a refreshing stream of English gold, which otherwise would have
been dried up. The Book of Nature might say, Leave the Boers and the
savages alone; but to a highly-cultured people the Book of Nature is a
blank, and the passions and prejudices, and fears and hopes, of the
passing hour are the only considerations by which the public and the
puppets it places in office are moved. Some of us still talk of the New
Testament; but he who were to quote it, even after Mr. Speaker had said
the prayers, in our High Court of Parliament, as bearing in any way on
national policy, would be as much laughed at as Dr. Kenealy or Major
O’Gorman. Meanwhile time will solve the problem—the storm will blow
over. The mob and the pictorial papers will glorify the returning heroes
who have crushed a savage who was mad enough to defy on his own behalf
and on that of his people the British power, and the British public will
have to pay the bill—not, unfortunately, the hard-working, over-taxed
working man; he is a myth, as much so as a mermaid or a griffin; but that
large middle-class, on whom the tax-gatherer instinctively preys; who
have been shorn so often that it has become to them a second nature; who
have been the mainstay of the country, but who are fast becoming, under
the weight of Imperial taxation for Imperial schemes, an extinct race.