The Committee desire to make it known that late last night they
received an intimation from Her Majesty's Agent in Pretoria to the
effect that the decision of the Government was that Johannesburg must
lay down its arms as a condition precedent to the discussion and
consideration of grievances.

The Committee met this morning to consider the position, and it was
unanimously resolved to accept the ultimatum of the Government for
reasons which the following communications sufficiently explain:

Here followed the High Commissioner's telegram to Sir Jacobus de Wet,
urging disarmament, already given, and the following memorandum:

Sir Jacobus de Wet, Her Majesty's Agent at Pretoria, has notified to
the Committee that he has been officially informed by the Government
in Pretoria that upon Johannesburg laying down its arms Dr. Jameson
will be handed over to Her Majesty's High Commissioner.

By Order.

Johannesburg, _7th January._
The above is correct.
J.A. DE WET,
H.B.M. Agent.

The Committee can add nothing to the above, and feel that there will
not be one man among the thousands who have joined the Reform
movement who will not find it consistent with honour and humanity to
co-operate loyally in the carrying out of the Committee's decision.

By order of the Committee.

On Wednesday the investigations effected by the Government, with the
aid of the Reform Committee, established the fact that the ultimatum
had been complied with; but the juggling with Dr. Jameson's life
continued for some days. On Thursday the 9th the High Commissioner
received a communication from the President in which occurred the
following sentence: 'As I had already caused your Excellency to be
informed, it is really my intention to act in this sense (_i.e._,
hand over Dr. Jameson and men), so that Dr. Jameson and the British
subjects who were under his command may then be punished by her
Majesty's Government, and I will make known to your Excellency the
final decision in this matter _as soon as Johannesburg shall have
reverted to a condition of quietness and order_.'

In the face of this and many other significant messages and
expressions which reached Sir Hercules Robinson, it is not to be
wondered at that he considered Dr. Jameson's life to be in peril, and
that he regarded, as he distinctly said he did, disarmament by
Johannesburg as the only means of saving him; but what is less
pardonable is, that he did not pin President Kruger to this, and
demand an explanation when it became known that Jameson and his men
were secured by the conditions of the surrender. The truth is that
the wily old Boer President, by a species of diplomacy which does not
now commend itself to civilized people, managed to jockey everybody
with whom he had any dealings. He is much in the position of a
certain financier who, after a vain effort to justify his
proceedings, turned at last in desperation upon his critics and said:
'Well, I don't care what view you hold of it. You can have the
morality, but I've got the cash.'

Late in the evening of the 9th the following proclamation was
published:

Whereas by resolution of the Government of the South African
Republic, dated Monday, the 6th of January, 1896, whereby to all
persons at Johannesburg and suburbs twenty-four hours were granted to
hand over and to lay down to the Government unconditionally all arms
and ammunition for which no permit could be shown, and

Whereas the said period of twenty-four hours has already expired on
Tuesday, the 7th of January, 1896, and whereas the so-called Reform
Committee and other British subjects have consented and decided to
comply unconditionally with the resolution of the Government, and

Whereas sundry persons already have laid down their arms and
ammunition, and have handed them over to the Government, and

Whereas the laying down and giving over of the said arms and
ammunition is still proceeding, and

Whereas it is desirable and proper that this be done as soon as
possible, and in a proper way, and that a term be fixed thereto,

Now I, Stephanus Johannes Paulus Kruger, State President of the South
African Republic, with the advice and consent of the Executive
Council, by virtue of Article 5 of their minutes, dated 9th January,
1896, proclaim that further time will be given for that purpose until
FRIDAY, the 10th JANUARY, 1896, at 6 p.m.

All persons or corporations with whom, after the expiration of that
period, arms or ammunition will be found, for which no permit granted
by Government can be shown, will be dealt with according to law; and

Whereas the laying down and handing over of the said arms and
ammunition should have been effected unconditionally,

Now I further proclaim that all persons who have already laid down
and given over the said arms and ammunition, or who shall have done
so before Friday, the 10th January, 1896, at 6 p.m., shall be
exempted from all prosecution, and will be forgiven for the misdeeds
that have taken place at Johannesburg and suburbs, _except all
persons and corporations who will appear to be the chief
offenders, ringleaders, leaders, instigators, and those who have
caused the rebellion at Johannesburg and suburbs_.

Such persons and corporations shall have to answer for their deeds
before the legal and competent courts of this Republic.

I further proclaim that I will address the inhabitants of
Johannesburg to-morrow by a separate proclamation.

_God save Land and People._

Given under my hand at the Government Office at Pretoria on this
Ninth Day of January, in the Year One Thousand Eight Hundred and
Ninety-six.

S.J.P. KRUGER,
_State President_.
C. VAN BOESCHOTEN,
_Acting State Secretary_.

The grim, cautious method of the President was never better
illustrated than by these proclamations and the concurrent actions.
In no part of his diplomatic career has he better stage-managed the
business than he did here. To the world at large these addresses
commend themselves no doubt as reasonable and moderate, and they
establish a record which will always speak for him when the
chronology of events is lost; but the true worth of it all is only
appreciated when one realizes that the first proclamation extending
the time for disarmament, and promising amnesty to all except the
leaders, was not issued until two days after the Government had
satisfied themselves that the disarmament had been completed, and
that it was deliberately held back until the police and burghers were
in the outskirts of the town ready to pounce upon the men with whom
they had been treating. It is an absolute fact that the Reform
Committee-men, who had offered to effect the peaceful settlement
seemingly desired by all parties, who had used every means in their
power to convince the Government that disarming was being effected in
a _bonâ fide_ and complete manner, and who had themselves supplied
the Government in good faith with any documents they had showing the
number of guns and the amount of ammunition which had been at the
disposal of the Reform Committee, had not the remotest suspicion that
an act of treachery was in contemplation, nor any hint that the
Government did not regard them as amnestied by virtue of the
negotiations; and it is a fact that when the proclamation of the 9th
was issued the detectives were waiting at the clubs, hotels and
houses to arrest the members of the Reform Committee, and that
the Reformers did not know of the proclamation exempting them from
the 'Forgive and Forget' until after they had been seized.

On the 10th the address promised to the inhabitants of Johannesburg
duly appeared.

After reviewing recent events, it concluded with this appeal:

Now I address you with full confidence! Strengthen the hands of the
Government, and work together with them to make this Republic a
country where all inhabitants, so to say, live fraternally together.
For months and months I have thought which alterations and
emendations would be desirable in the Government of this State, but
the unwarrantable instigations, especially of the Press, have kept me
back. The same men who now appear in public as the leaders have
demanded amendments from me in a time and manner which they should
not have dared to use in their own country out of fear of the penal
law. Through this it was made impossible for me and my burghers, the
founders of this Republic, to take your proposals into consideration.
It is my intention to submit a draft law at the first ordinary
session of the Volksraad, whereby a municipality with a Mayor at its
head will be appointed for Johannesburg, to whom the whole municipal
government of this town will be entrusted. According to all
constitutional principles, such a municipal council should be
appointed by the election of the inhabitants. I ask you earnestly,
with your hand upon your heart, to answer me this question: Dare I,
and should I, after all that has happened, propose such to the
Volksraad? What I myself answer to this question is, I know that
there are thousands in Johannesburg to whom I can with confidence
entrust this right to vote in municipal matters. Inhabitants of
Johannesburg, make it possible for the Government to appear before
the Volksraad with the motto, 'Forget and Forgive.'

(Signed)   S.J.P. KRUGER,
_State President_.

One would think that anyone gifted with even a moderate sense of
humour would have been restrained by it from issuing a second
proclamation on top of the elaborate fooling of the first. Is it
possible to imagine any other community or any other Government in
the world in which the ruler could seriously set to work to
promulgate two such proclamations, sandwiching as they did those acts
which may be regarded as the practical expression--diametrically
opposed to the published expression--of his intentions?

In the meantime the negotiations concerning Dr. Jameson were dragging
on. After securing the disarmament of Johannesburg and getting rid of
the troublesome question of the disposal of Jameson, and after
refusing for several days (to quote the gist of the High
Commissioner's telegram, Blue Book No. 125 [C-7933]) to allow the
necessary arrangements for the deportation of the men to be made, Mr.
Kruger suddenly called upon the High Commissioner to have them
removed at once, intimating at the same time that it was the decision
of the Executive that all the prisoners, except the Transvaal and
Free State subjects, whom he would retain, should be sent to England
to be tried according to English law. It was pointed out that it was
only contemplated to send the officers for trial. To this Mr. Kruger
replied: 'In such case the whole question must be reconsidered.'
The High Commissioner at once telegraphed for the decision of Her
Majesty's Government, stating that it was the opinion of Sir Jacobus
de Wet and Sir Graham Bower, who had represented him at the interview
with the Transvaal Government, that, if the whole lot were not sent
home to be dealt with according to English law, they would be tried
in Pretoria, with a result which he feared would be deplorable. To
this Mr. Chamberlain replied:

Astonished that Council should hesitate to fulfil the engagement
which we understood was made by President with you, and confirmed by
the Queen, on the faith of which you secured disarmament of
Johannesburg. Any delay will produce worst impression here, and may
lead to serious consequences. I have already promised that all the
leaders shall be brought to trial immediately; but it would be absurd
to try the rank and file, who only obeyed orders which they could not
refuse. If desired we may however engage to bring to England all who
are not domiciled in South Africa; but we cannot undertake to bring
all the rank and file to trial, for that would make a farce of the
whole proceedings, and is contrary to the practice of all civilized
Governments. As regards a pledge that they shall be punished, the
President will see on consideration that although a Government can
order a prosecution, it cannot in any free country compel a
conviction. You may remind him that the murderers of Major Elliott,
who were tried in the Transvaal in 1881, were acquitted by a jury of
burghers. Compare also the treatment by us of Stellaland and other
freebooters.

The result of this communication was that the President drew in his
horns and agreed that if the prisoners were deported to England he
would be satisfied to let the British Government decide which of them
should be prosecuted.

The success of his diplomatic methods had whetted his appetite, it
would appear. He was not content with the conditional surrender of
Dr. Jameson, nor--having suppressed the fact that it was
conditional--with having used him for the purpose of disarming
Johannesburg; but, having achieved both purposes, Mr. Kruger was
still desirous of keeping him in hand. This however was a length to
which the British Government did not see fit to go; but there is no
evidence in the correspondence which has passed tending to show that
even then Sir Hercules Robinson perceived how he was being made use
of and played with by the President.

On the night of the 9th and the morning of the 10th, the members of
the Reform Committee to the number of about sixty were arrested and
lodged in gaol; and from this moment the High Commissioner appears to
have erased them from the tablets of his memory. On January 14 he
telegraphed to Mr. Chamberlain as follows:

I have received a letter from Government of South African Republic,
stating that, in their opinion, every reason exists for assuming that
the complications at Johannesburg are approaching to an end, and that
there need be no longer any fear of further bloodshed. The President
of the South African Republic and Executive Council tender to me the
warmest thanks of the Government of the South African Republic for
the assistance I have been able to render in preventing further
bloodshed, and their congratulations on the manner in which my object
in coming has been fulfilled. They tender also their cordial
acknowledgment of the services rendered by the British Agent at
Pretoria, which I think is fully deserved. The Volksraad met
yesterday, and adjourned until May, the only business transacted
being a vote of thanks to the Orange Free State and the High
Commissioner for their efforts in promoting a peaceful settlement,
which was carried by acclamation. I now only await settlement of
prisoners' difficulty to leave for Capetown, where my presence is
urgently needed in consequence of change of Ministers. Governor of
Natal and General Cox are here, to whom I will give instructions as
to reception and disposal of prisoners as soon as I hear from you.

To this Mr. Chamberlain telegraphed a most important reply on January
15:

I am left in great perplexity by your telegram No. 3, of the 14th
inst., and fear that some previous telegrams must have miscarried.
(Here follow directions to refer to a number of telegrams in which
Mr. Chamberlain had indicated the settlement which he anticipated,
the nature of the reforms which Sir Hercules Robinson was to secure,
and many inquiries as to the reason for the arrests of the reformers
as reported in the English papers.) I have received no reply to any
of these telegrams, but have assumed that negotiations were in
progress between the President and yourself.

There can be no settlement until the questions raised by these
telegrams are disposed of. The people of Johannesburg laid down their
arms in the belief that reasonable concessions would be arranged by
your intervention; and until these are granted, or are definitely
promised to you by the President, the root-causes of the recent
troubles will remain.

The President has again and again promised reform, and especially on
the 30th December last, when he promised reforms in education and
franchise; and grave dissatisfaction would be excited if you left
Pretoria without a clear understanding on these points. Her Majesty's
Government invite President Kruger, in the interests of the South
African Republic and of peace, to make a full declaration on these
matters. I am also awaiting a reply respecting the alleged wholesale
arrests of English, Americans and other nationalities, made after the
surrender of Johannesburg.

It will be your duty to use firm language, and to tell the President
that neglect to meet the admitted grievances of the Uitlanders by
giving a definite promise to propose reasonable concessions would
have a disastrous effect upon the prospects of a lasting and
satisfactory settlement.

Send me a full report of the steps that you have already taken with
regard to this matter, and of the further action that you propose.

In the meantime Sir Hercules Robinson left Pretoria, satisfied that
he had done all that was necessary, and telegraphed to Mr.
Chamberlain as follows:

FROM THE HIGH COMMISSIONER _en route_ TO CAPETOWN.

_15th January_, 1896. No. 1.--Your telegram 13 January, No. 1, only
reached me last night, after I had left Pretoria. I could if you
consider it desirable, communicate purport to President of South
African Republic by letter, but I myself think such action would be
inopportune at this moment. Nearly all leading Johannesburg men are
now in gaol, charged with treason against the State, and it is
rumoured that Government has written evidence of a long-standing and
widespread conspiracy to seize government of country on the plea of
denial of political privileges, and to incorporate the country with
that of British South Africa Company. The truth of these reports will
be tested in the trials to take place shortly in the High Court, and
meanwhile to urge claim for extended political privileges for the
very men so charged would be ineffectual and impolitic. President of
South African Republic has already promised municipal government to
Johannesburg, and has stated in a proclamation that all grievances
advanced in a constitutional manner will be carefully considered and
brought before the Volksraad without loss of time; but until result
of trials is known nothing of course will now be done.

Mr. Chamberlain replied to the above:

_15th January_. No. 5.--Referring to your telegram, No. 1, of the
15th January, see my telegram No. 1 of to-day, which was sent before
receipt of yours. I recognize that the actual moment is not opportune
for a settlement of the Uitlanders' grievances, and that the position
of the President of the South African Republic may be an embarrassing
one, but I do not consider that the arrest of a few score individuals
out of a population of 70,000 or more, or the supposed existence of a
plot amongst that small minority, is a reason for denying to the
overwhelming majority of innocent persons reforms which are just in
themselves and expedient in the interests of the Republic. Whatever
may be said about the conduct of a few individuals, nothing can be
plainer than that the sober and industrious majority refused to
countenance any resort to violence, and proved their readiness to
obey the law and your authority. I hope, therefore, to hear at an
early date that you propose to resume discussion with President of
South African Republic on lines laid down in my previous telegrams. I
do not see that the matter need wait until the conclusion of the
trial of the supposed plotters. I am anxious to receive the
information asked for in my telegram No. 1 of the 14th January.
Please communicate at once with the President on this matter.

The following is the telegram to which allusion is made above:

_14th January_. No. 1.--Press telegrams state numerous arrests of
leading residents on the Rand, including many Americans, Germans, and
other nationalities. Fear that number of these arrests of active
managers, representatives, may disorganize industry on the Rand. Wish
to know of what accused, when brought to trial, whether bail allowed,
and what penalities prescribed by law. Shall be glad to learn from
President of South African Republic what his intentions are in this
matter, which affects the subjects of so many States. Propose to
communicate President's reply to American and Belgian Governments,
which have already asked us to take charge of interests of their
respective citizens.

Sir Hercules Robinson, replied:

_15th January_. No. 2.--Your telegram of 14th January, No. 1. The
accused are between fifty and sixty in number, and are mostly members
of the Reform Committee. They have been arrested on charge of
treason, and of seeking to subvert the State by inviting the
co-operation and entrance into it of an armed force. The proceedings
are based, I understand, on sworn information, and the trials will
take place before High Court. The accused are being well treated, and
are represented by able counsel. It is alleged that Government has
documentary evidence of a widespread conspiracy to seize upon
Government, and make use of the wealth of the country to rehabilitate
finances of British South Africa Company. On taking leave of
President of South African Republic, I urged on him moderation as
regards the accused, so as not to alienate the sympathy he now enjoys
of all right-minded persons. Bail is a matter entirely in the hands
of Attorney-General. The Government seem acting within their legal
rights, and I do not see how I can interfere. Mines are at work, and
industry does not seem to be disorganized.

While still on his way to Capetown, the High Commissioner telegraphed
to Mr. Chamberlain again in a manner indicating his complete
abandonment of the position taken up by him in relation to
Johannesburg--in fact, his repudiation of what his own words have
recorded against him:

_16th January_. No. i.--Your telegram of 15th January, No. 1,
received. I cannot at this moment follow the complications arising
from supposed missing and crossing telegrams, but can only say that
no telegram which has reached me from you has remained unanswered.

No promise was made to Johannesburg by me as an inducement to disarm,
except that the promises made in the President's previous
proclamation would be adhered to, and that Jameson and the other
prisoners would not be transferred until Johannesburg had
unconditionally laid down its arms and surrendered. I sent your long
telegram of 4th January to President; _but the question of
concessions to Uitlanders has never been discussed between us_.
Pending result of coming trials, and the extent to which Johannesburg
is implicated in the alleged conspiracy to subvert the State is made
clear, the question of political privileges would not be entertained
by Government of the South African Republic.

He justified the change of policy in another communication addressed
to Mr. Chamberlain before he reached Capetown:

_16th January_. No. 3.--Your telegram of the 15th January, No. 5. If
you will leave the matter in my hands, I will _resume_ advocacy of
Uitlanders' claims at the first moment I think it can be done with
advantage; the present moment is most inopportune, as the strongest
feeling of irritation and indignation against the Uitlanders exists
both amongst the Burghers and Members of Volksraad of both Republics.
Any attempt to dictate in regard to the internal affairs of South
African Republic at this moment would be resisted by all parties in
South Africa, and would do great harm.

I have already replied in my telegram of 15th January, No. 2, in
answer to your telegram of 14th January, No. 1, and I do not think it
possible to obtain further information at this stage, the matter
being _sub judice_.

Sir Hercules Robinson left Pretoria on the 14th, having resided
within a few hundred yards of Dr. Jameson and his comrades for a
week, and of the Reform prisoners for four days, without making any
attempt whatever to ascertain their circumstances or story. During
that time his military secretary called upon Dr. Jameson for the
purpose of finding out details of the prisoners and wounded of the
force, but made no further inquiries. Dr. Jameson's solicitor wrote
to the Colonial Office on March 5:

MY DEAR FAIRFIELD,

You have probably seen the cable that has come to the _Diggers'
News_, giving the lie direct to Sir John Willoughby's statement
respecting terms of surrender.

I have seen Sir John again, and am authorized by him to state, with
regard to the criticism that it is incredible that nothing should
have been said by the officers when in prison at Pretoria to anybody
about the terms of surrender, that it must be remembered that from
the time of the surrender until they left Africa none of them were
allowed to make any communication. While in gaol they were not
allowed to see newspapers or to receive any news of what was going on
in Pretoria or elsewhere.

Sir J. Willoughby made a statement to the head gaoler and other
officials at the time of his arrival at the gaol when he was searched
and all his papers taken from him. He requested to be allowed to keep
the document signed by Cronjé, as it contained the terms of the
surrender, but received as answer that all papers must be taken and
that they would be returned afterwards. They were in fact taken and
only returned when the officers were removed from the gaol to go to
Durban.

My clients did try to get a note through to Johannesburg concealed in
a matchbox. They paid twenty-five pounds to get it through, and sent
it within thirty-six hours of their arrival in gaol, but they have
never been able to ascertain whether it reached its destination.

The gist of it was that they were all right. It never occurred to the
prisoners that neither the British Resident nor the High Commissioner
would be informed of the terms of the surrender, or that they would
not satisfy themselves on this point.

Sir Hercules Robinson might urge, in so far as Dr. Jameson's affair
is concerned, that he could not be expected to suspect a deception
such as was practised upon him; yet it does seem extraordinary that,
being in Pretoria for the purpose of negotiating for the disposal of
Dr. Jameson and his comrades, he should not have taken steps to
ascertain what there was to be said on their behalf, especially as on
his own showing it was for the greater part of the time a question of
life and death for the leaders of the force. It is even more
difficult to understand why no effort should have been made to
communicate with the Reformers. The High Commissioner was thoroughly
well aware of the negotiations between them and the Government on
January 1. He had received communications by telegraph from the
Reformers before he left Capetown; he came up avowedly to settle
their business; he negotiated on their behalf and induced them to
disarm; he witnessed their arrest and confinement in gaol; yet not
only did he not visit them himself, nor send an accredited member of
his staff to inquire into their case and conditions, but Sir Jacobus
de Wet alleges that he actually, in deference to the wish of the
President, desired the British Agent not to hold any communication
whatever with the prisoners during his (Sir Hercules Robinson's)
stay in Pretoria. Truly we have had many examples of President
Kruger's audacity, and of the success of it; but nothing to equal
this. That he demanded from Sir Hercules Robinson information as to
the objects of the Flying Squadron and the movements of British
troops in British territory, and succeeded in getting it, was a
triumph; but surely not on a par with that of desiring the High
Commissioner not to hold communication with the British subjects whom
he, as the official representative of their sovereign, had travelled
a thousand miles to disarm, and on whose behalf--ostensibly--he was
there to negotiate.




CHAPTER VIII.

ARREST AND TRIAL OF THE REFORMERS.


About half of the members of the Reform Committee were arrested and
taken through to Pretoria on the night of the 9th. Others were
arrested at various times during the evening and night, were detained
in the lock-up at Johannesburg as ordinary felons, and escorted to
the Pretoria gaol on the following morning. The scene on their
arrival at Pretoria railway station and during their march to the
gaol was not creditable to the Boers. A howling mob surrounded the
prisoners, hustling them, striking them, and hurling abuse at them
incessantly. The mounted burghers acting as an escort forced their
horses at the unfortunate men on foot, jostling them and threatening
to ride them down. One of the prisoners, a man close on sixty years
of age, was thrown by an excited patriot and kicked and trampled on
before he was rescued by some of his comrades.

Once within the gaol, the men were searched and locked up in the
cells, and treated exactly as black or white felons of the lowest
description. In many cases four or five men were incarcerated in
single cells 9 feet long by 5 feet 6 inches wide, with one small
grating for ventilation. At night they were obliged to lie on the mud
floor, or in some cases on filthy straw mattresses left in the cells
by former occupants. No provision was made by which they could obtain
blankets or other covering--indeed at first it was not necessary, as
the overcrowding and lack of ventilation very nearly resulted in
asphyxiation. With an inhumanity almost incredible, in one instance
one of the prisoners, suffering from fever and dysentery, was locked
up for twelve hours with four others in such a cell without any
sanitary provisions whatever. Friends in Pretoria induced the
authorities, by means not unpopular in that place, to admit a better
class of food than that allowed to the ordinary prisoners; and it is
stated that the first meal enjoyed by the Reformers cost close upon
£100 for introduction. Day by day fresh concessions were obtained in
a similar manner, with the result that before long the prisoners were
allowed to have their own clothing and beds and such food as they
chose to order. Nothing however could alter the indescribable
sanitary conditions, nor compensate for the fact that the cells
occupied by these men were in many cases swarming with vermin.

The climate in Pretoria in January is almost tropical, and the
sufferings of many of the older and less robust men under such
circumstances were very considerable. On the eleventh day of
incarceration the majority of the prisoners were let out on bail of
£2,000 each; in the cases of two or three bail of £4,000 each was
required; but bail was refused to Colonel Rhodes, Messrs. Phillips,
Farrar, Hammond (the signatories to the letter), and J.P.
FitzPatrick, the secretary of the Reform Committee. These five
continued to occupy the undesirable premises for four weeks more, at
the end of which time, owing to the serious effect upon their health
which imprisonment under these conditions had produced, and owing to
the repeated representations within the Transvaal and from the
British Government as well, an alteration was made under somewhat
novel conditions.

It was notified to the public that the Government had graciously
consented to admit the prisoners to bail. The terms, however, were
not at the time publicly announced. First and foremost it was
required of them that they should deposit £10,000 in sovereigns each
as security that they would not break the conditions of their altered
imprisonment. They were to reside in a cottage in Pretoria under
strong guard, and they were to pay the whole of the costs of their
detention, including the salary and living expenses of the officer
and guard placed over them. The cost, including interest upon the
money deposited, was upwards of £1,000 a month.

The preliminary examination into the charges against the Reformers
began on February 3, and lasted about a month. It resulted in the
committal for trial, on the charge of high treason, of all those
arrested. The Imperial Government having decided to send a
representative to watch the trial on behalf of the British, American
and Belgian subjects, Mr. J. Rose Innes, Q.C., the leader of the Bar
in Cape Colony, attended on their behalf. It was intimated to the
Transvaal Government that Mr. Innes would represent the Imperial
Government; but objection was made to this on the grounds that he had
been admitted to the Pretoria Bar during the British administration,
and had failed to comply with a subsequent rule of Court which
required some sort of registration; and permission was refused to him
to address the Court. The objection was maintained, and Mr. Innes was
obliged to limit his participation in the affair to sitting at the
counsels' table and consulting and advising with the Pretoria
barristers employed to defend the prisoners.

The examination was, as Dr. Coster the State Attorney announced, of
the nature of a fishing examination, and he claimed to be permitted
to conduct it in a manner which, he alleged, is popular in Holland,
but which is entirely unknown in the Transvaal, and certainly does
not obtain in any British possession. The chief feature of this
system appears to be a total disregard of the rules applying to
evidence. A few instances will suffice. One of the first witnesses
called was Judge Ameshof, who with Chief-Justice Kotzé and Mr. Kock
formed the Government Commission appointed to meet the deputation
from the Reform Committee on January 1. Judge Ameshof was duly sworn,
and was asked to identify a list of the members of the Reform
Committee. He did so. He stated that it was the list supplied to the
Government Commission at the meeting of January 1 by the deputation
of the Reform Committee, and he regarded it therefore as authentic.
The deputation had stated to the Commission that it was so.

This was the first revelation of the tactics about to be pursued by
the Government, in using information which had been given under
privilege and in good faith by the prisoners themselves, when
negotiating with the Government prior to any question of arrest being
raised. Mr. Wessels, counsel for the accused, rose to obtain from
Judge Ameshof the official account of the meeting, desiring to prove
this very important negotiation by means of witnesses on the
Government side. He got no further however than saying to the
witness, 'You said you were a member of the Government Commission?'
when Judge Ameshof replied, 'Yes, but if you are going to ask me
about anything that took place at that meeting, I cannot answer,
because the meeting was a privileged one.' Mr. Wessels did not lose
his opportunity, 'You have stated,' he said, 'that you are a Judge of
the High Court?' The witness signified assent. 'And you mean to tell
me,' Mr. Wessels continued, 'that you feel yourself free to divulge
so much as it suits the Government to reveal, but that as soon as I
wish to prove something to my clients' advantage the interview
becomes privileged?' The witness did not answer, and Mr. Wessels
appealed to the Court. Judicial Commissioner Zeiler, however, upheld
the witness's contention. Mr. Wessels urged in reply that if it was a
privileged interview he objected to any evidence whatever being given
in connection with it, and protested vehemently against the admission
of the list of members just sworn to. The objection was overruled,
and it was thus laid down that the interview was privileged as far as
the Government was concerned, but not in so far as it could benefit
the Reformers.

Another case was that of Mr. Schumacher, a witness who testified,
_inter alia_, that he did not know what the objects of a certain
Development Syndicate were. His evidence showed that he had not been
informed upon this point. He was very hard pressed by the State
Attorney, but he adhered to his first answer. Dr. Coster then altered
his tactics and asked, 'Had you no opinions on the subject? Did you
not guess at all?' The witness replied that he might have thought and
conjectured at various times, but that he had nothing in the nature
of information or knowledge on the point. This did not satisfy Dr.
Coster, who then pressed the question, 'Well, what did you think?
What were your thoughts?' The witness objected to state what his
thoughts were, as they could have no bearing on the fact, and might
be absolutely wide of the mark. He could only repeat that he had no
knowledge. The witness appealed to the Bench for protection. Mr.
Wessels urged that it was an unheard-of proceeding to compel a
witness to state what he thought and to use it as evidence. The
objections were again overruled, and the witness was ordered by
the Court to answer. His reply afforded no satisfaction to the
Government, being to the effect that he could not then remember what
his thoughts were at various times. On the application of the State
Attorney the Judicial Commissioner sent him to gaol for twelve hours
for contempt of court.

Mr. Wessels strenuously objected to the decision and applied to the
Court to stay imprisonment to enable him to appeal to a judge in
chambers, but even this was refused. Mr. Wessels in the course of his
address received a reprimand from the Bench for stating that he now
recognized the force of the State Attorney's contention that the law
of evidence as obtaining in South Africa was not sufficiently wide;
for, he added, he thought it would suit the purpose of the Government
better if they reverted to an older system under which racks and
thumbscrews were popular.

The witness was sent to gaol. Some hours later an appeal was heard by
Judge de Korté in chambers, and the decision of the Judicial
Commissioner was reversed, but the prisoner had already completed
seven hours' imprisonment in a dirty cell. Judge de Korté stated that
he had reversed the decision after consultation with Chief Justice
Kotzé, and it was felt that something at least had been achieved by
Mr. Schumacher, and the rights of a witness would be recognized. But
the end is not always in sight in dealing with the Transvaal
Government. The State Attorney in turn appealed from the single
judge's decision to the full Bench. Judge Morice, a Scotchman, many
years a judge of the High Court, supported the decision of Judge de
Korté. The Chief Justice, who had advised Judge de Korté in his
decision however in a most extraordinary judgment now reversed it,
and in this view he was supported by Judge Ameshof--himself a witness
in the case against the Reformers.

Thus the majority judgment of the High Court against the Reformers on
this principle of evidence happened to be formulated by the two
judges who had been appointed to negotiate with the Reformers'
deputation on behalf of the Government.

The impossibility of obtaining justice in the Courts of the Transvaal
under the then conditions was thus brought home to the prisoners. An
appeal from the decision of the Lower Court on Judge Ameshof's
interpretation of privilege, which had been seriously discussed, was
then abandoned as being worse than useless, and calculated only to
provoke more extreme measures against the prisoners by placing the
Bench in a ridiculous position. It could not be expected that the
Chief Justice, who was himself a member of the Government Commission
which Judge Ameshof had claimed to be privileged, would take any
other view than that favouring the policy and convenience of the
Government which he showed himself so ready to befriend.

In the Schumacher appeal case before the full Court, Dr. Coster had
made no secret that he intended to disregard the rules and precedents
governing the treatment of witnesses, and even claimed that he should
receive no opposition from the prisoners' counsel, since he was only
'_fishing_' for evidence and not actually accumulating it against the
prisoners, and had no intention of using the evidence given at this
examination. Mr. Wessels asked him whether he would pledge himself to