which is worth being in the Transvaal. A piece of ground lying to the
north-west of Johannesburg close up to the town had originally been
proclaimed as a goldfield, but no reefs having been found there and
the ground not having been pegged, it was afterwards withdrawn from
proclamation. The Mining Commissioner of Johannesburg in the course
of his duties discovered some flaw in the second or withdrawing
proclamation. He advised the head office in Pretoria of this
discovery and stated that it might be contended that the
de-proclamation was invalid, and that great loss and inconvenience
would follow if the ground were pegged and the title upheld. Within
twenty-four hours the ground was pegged by Mr. Eloff, but it is not
known whence he derived the inspiration. His claim was strongly
opposed by the local officials. They reported that the ground was
known to be of no value, and advised that as the cost of licenses
would be very considerable the obvious policy of the Government would
be--if the title could not be upset--to wait until Mr. Eloff should
tire of paying licenses on valueless ground. The Government, however,
decided otherwise: they converted Mr. Eloff's claims into residential
stands; that is to say, they made him a present of an immensely
valuable piece of property and gave him title under which he could
cut it up into small plots and readily sell it. This action of the
Government, however, required confirmation by the Raad. The matter
came before the Volksraad in due course and that body deliberately
revoked the decision of the Government and refused Mr. Eloff any
title except what he could claim according to law. But Mr. Kruger is
not so easily beaten. He soon discovered that the piece of ground
acquired by Mr. Eloff was exactly the piece which it was necessary
for the Government to have for a coolie location, and without more
ado the Government bought it from Mr. Eloff for £25,000.

The ingenuity of the Boer mind in getting the last possible
fraction of value out of any transaction, is well exemplified in this
matter. One would naturally conclude that a deal so profitable would
satisfy anybody. But not so! The piece of ground commands the
approach to many valuable private plots and residences, and it was
soon found that apart from intrinsic worth it might have a
blackmailing value; thus towards the end of 1898, after the deal had
been completed, the owners of these residences and estates were
privately approached with the information that the coolie location,
consisting of shelters built of scraps of iron, paraffin tins, and
old pieces of wood, was to be removed to this site (probably to
facilitate the transference of the present location site, which is
also very valuable, to some other favourite), but that if sufficient
inducement were offered by landowners in the neighbourhood, the
decision would be reconsidered!

The grant of a Municipality to Johannesburg has often been quoted as
an example of something done by Mr. Kruger in the interests of the
Uitlanders. The principal conditions of that grant are that all
burghers of the State, whether they have property or not, shall be
entitled to vote for the election of councillors; that each ward
shall be represented by two councillors, one of whom must be a
burgher; and that the chairman, or burgomaster, shall be appointed by
Government and shall have the right of veto. The elections in at
least two of the wards are completely at the mercy of the police and
of the poor Boers who have no interest whatever in the town. The
burghers in Johannesburg--police, Boers, and officials--who may
number a couple of thousand, including the naturalized lot, have
therefore a permanent and considerable majority over the Uitlanders,
who probably number over 40,000 adult white males.

The scope and value of this grant were made manifest when the now
notorious sewerage concession came under discussion. The Municipality
had upon several occasions endeavoured to get the right to introduce
a scheme for the disposal of the sewage of the town, and had applied
for authority to raise the necessary funds, but had been refused.
Suddenly a concession was granted by the Government--they called it a
contract--to Mr. Emmanuel Mendelssohn, the proprietor of the
_Standard and Diggers News_, the Government organ in Johannesburg.
He said that he got it for nothing--possibly a reward for loyal
services; but he also stated that he was not the sole owner. The
value of the grant was estimated by the concessionaire himself to be
about £1,000,000 sterling, and in the lately published proposals
which he made to one of the big firms interested in the Transvaal he
indicated how a profit of £100,000 a year could be made out of it.
The Town Council unanimously and vigorously protested; but the
Government took no notice of their protest. They then decided to
apply to the Court for an order restraining the Government from
making this grant, on the ground that they had no power to alienate a
right which belonged to the town itself. In order to make the
application to Court it was necessary, in terms of the constitution
of the municipality, to obtain the signature of the Burgomaster. That
official as representing the Government refused point blank to
authorize the council to dispute the Government's action in a Court
of Law, and the council were obliged to apply for an Order of Court
compelling the Burgomaster to sign the documents necessary to enable
them to contest in the Courts of the country the validity of an act
of the Government which was deemed to be infringement upon the rights
of the town. In the face of this the President capitulated for the
time being; but neither he nor the concessionaire makes any secret of
the determination to find a _quid pro quo_.

The year 1898 brought in its turn its full share of fresh
encroachments and exactions. The bare enumeration of the concessions,
privileges, and contracts, proposed or agreed to, is sufficient to
indicate what must be the condition of mind of one whose interests
are at stake under such a _régime_. Not all 'concessions,'
'contracts,' and 'protected factories' confer exclusive rights, but
many might easily in effect do so and all are infringements upon the
rights of the public. Here are some from the official list of
1899;--Dynamite, Railways, Spirits, Iron, Sugar, Wool, Bricks,
Earthenware, Paper, Candles, Soap, Calcium Carbide, Oil, Matches,
Cocoa, Bottles, Jam, &c.

A large loan had been constantly talked of throughout the year, but
no one knew for what purpose it could be required. The Government
vouchsafed no information at all but negotiations were carried on
both in Pretoria and in Europe. Month after month went by, but the
millions were not forthcoming, and the Government believed or
affected to believe that their failure was due to a conspiracy among
the capitalists, and in retaliation they directed and subsidised a
fierce anti-capitalist campaign in their press. The explanation of
failure, which did not occur to them, may have been that investors
believed that the course pursued by the Transvaal Government must
inevitably lead to conflict with the paramount power, and they had no
faith and no assurance that in the event of such a conflict taking
place the British Government would take over loans which must have
been contracted only for the purposes of war against England.

The juggling with the dynamite question continued throughout the
year. The President had successfully defeated the aim of the
Volksraad, and the investigation and reports which had been ordered
by that body in 1897 to be made by lawyers and auditors, although
duly handed into the Government, were suppressed by the President and
not permitted to be shown to the Raad. On the contrary, the
astounding proposition was made that in return for a very
inconsiderable reduction in the cost of dynamite (half of which was
to be made up by the Government sacrificing its share of profits) and
a possible further reduction of 5s. per case under certain
conditions, the monopoly should be renewed for a period of fifteen
years, all breaches in the past to be condoned, and cancellation on
the ground of breach of contract in the future to be impossible. This
proposal, it was publicly notified, would be laid before the Raad
during the first session of 1899. The existence of the dynamite
monopoly was at this time costing the industry £600,000 a year, and
on every possible occasion it was represented to the Government that,
if they really did need further revenue, in no way could it be more
easily or more properly raised than by exercising their undoubted
right to cancel the monopoly and by imposing a duty of such amount as
might be deemed necessary upon imported dynamite. It was also pointed
out that the proposed reduction in the cost of dynamite would offer
no relief whatever since it was far more than counterbalanced by the
taxes upon mynpachts and profits which were then being imposed.

During this year the Volksraad instructed the Government to
enforce their right to collect 2-1/2 per cent. of the gross
production from mynpachts (mining leases). All mynpachts titles
granted by the Government contained a clause giving the Government
this power, so that they were acting strictly within their legal
rights; but the right had never before been exercised. For twelve
years investors had been allowed to frame their estimates of profit
upon a certain basis, and suddenly without a day's warning this
tax was sprung upon them. It was indisputably the right of the
Government, but equally indisputably was it most unwise; both because
of the manner in which it was done and because there was no necessity
whatever for the doing of it, as the revenue of the country was
already greatly in excess of the legitimate requirements. Immediately
following this came a resolution to impose a tax of 5 per cent. upon
the profits of all companies working mining ground other than that
covered by mynpacht. The same objections applied to this tax with the
additional one, that no clause existed in the titles indicating that
it could be done and no warning had ever been given that it would be
done. The proposal was introduced one morning and adopted at once;
the first notice to investors was the accomplished fact. These
measures were particularly keenly resented in France and Germany.

The grievance of hasty legislation was in these cases aggravated by
the evidence that the taxes were quite unnecessary. President Kruger
still fought against cancellation of the Dynamite Monopoly, by which
the State revenue would have benefited to the extent of £600,000 a
year, if he had accepted the proposal of the Uitlanders, to allow
importation of dynamite subject to a duty of £2 per case--a tax
which represented the monopolists' profit, and would not therefore
have increased the cost of the article to the mines. He still
persisted in squandering and misapplying the public funds. He
still openly followed the policy of satisfying his burghers at the
Uitlanders' expense; but the burghers have a growing appetite, and
nothing shows the headlong policy of 'squaring'--nothing better
illustrates the Uitlanders' grievance of reckless extravagance in
administration--than the list of fixed salaries as it has grown year
by year since the goldfields became a factor.

TRANSVAAL FIXED SALARIES.

£        s.     d.
1886             51,831     3     7
1887             99,083    12     8
1888            164,466     4    10
1889            249,641    10    10
1890            324,520     8    10
1891            332,888    13     9
1892            323,608     0     0
1893            361,275     6    11
1894            419,775    13    10
1895            570,047    12     7
1896            813,029     7     5
1897            996,959    19    11
1898          1,080,382     3     0
1899 (Budget) 1,216,394     5     0

That is to say, the Salary List is now twenty-four times as great as
it was when the Uitlanders began to come in in numbers. It amounts to
nearly five times as much as the total revenue amounted to then. It
is now sufficient if equally distributed to pay £40 per head per
annum to the total male Boer population.

The liquor curse has grown to such dimensions and the illicit liquor
organization has secured such a firm hold that even the stoutest
champions of law and order doubt at times whether it will ever be
possible to combat the evil. The facts of the case reflect more
unfavourably upon the President than perhaps any other single thing.
These are the facts: The law prohibits the sale of liquor to natives;
yet from a fifth to a third of the natives on the Rand are habitually
drunk. The fault rests with a corrupt and incompetent administration.
That administration is in the hands of the President's relations and
personal following. The remedy urged by the State Secretary, State
Attorney, some members of the Executive, the general public, and the
united petition of all the ministers of religion in the country, is
to entrust the administration to the State Attorney's department and
to maintain the existing law. In the face of this President Kruger
has fought hard to have the total prohibition law abolished and has
successfully maintained his nepotism--to apply no worse construction!
In replying to a deputation of liquor dealers he denounced the
existing law as an 'immoral' one, because by restricting the
sale of liquor it deprived a number of honest people of their
livelihood--and President Kruger is a total abstainer!

The effect of this liquor trade is indescribable; the loss in money
although enormous is a minor consideration compared with the crimes
committed and the accidents in the mines traceable to it; and the
effect upon the native character is simply appalling.

Much could be said about this native question apart from the subject
of drink, for it is one which is very difficult of just appreciation
by any but those who have had considerable experience of and personal
contact with the natives. It is one upon which there is a great
divergence of views between the people of Europe and the people of
South Africa. South Africans believe that they view it from the
rational standpoint, they believe also that Europeans as a rule view
it more from the sentimental. The people who form their opinions from
the writings and reports of missionaries only, or who have in their
mind's eye the picturesque savage in his war apparel as seen at
Earl's Court, or the idealized native of the novelist, cannot
possibly understand the real native. The writer holds South African
views upon the native question, that is to say that the natives are
to all intents and purposes a race of children, and should be treated
as such, with strict justice and absolute fidelity to promise,
whether it be of punishment or reward: a simple consistent policy
which the native mind can grasp and will consequently respect.

With this in mind it will, perhaps, be believed that the recital of
certain instances of injustice is not made with the object of
appealing to sentimentalism, or of obliquely influencing opinions
which might otherwise be unfavourable or indifferent. The cases
quoted in this volume are those which have been decided by the
courts, or the evidence in support of them is given, and they are
presented because they are typical cases, and not, except in the
matter of public exposure, isolated ones. The report of the case of
Toeremetsjani, the native chieftainess,{48} is taken verbatim from
one of the newspapers of the time. The woman is the head of the
Secocoeni tribe, whose successful resistance to the Transvaal
Government was one of the alleged causes of the annexation. A good
deal could be said about the ways of Native Commissioners in such
matters. Much also could be said about the case of the British
Indians and the effect upon the population of India which is produced
by the coming and going of thousands of these annually between India
and the Transvaal, and their recital of the treatment to which
they are subjected, their tales of appeals to the great British
Government, and their account of the latter's inability to protect
them. Much also could be said of the Cape Boy question, but
sufficient prominence has been given to these matters by the
publication of the official documents and the report of the inquiry
into Field-Cornet Lombaard's conduct, which was held at the instance
of the British Government.

It is not suggested that if the Government in the Transvaal were
influenced by the vote of the white British subjects, or if it were
entirely dominated by such vote, any encouragement would be given to
the Indian hawkers and traders, or that there would be any
disposition whatever to give voting rights to coloured people of any
kind, but it _is_ suggested that a more enlightened and a more just
system of treatment would be adopted; and in any case it is to be
presumed that there would be no appeals to the British Government,
involving exhibitions of impotency on the part of the Empire to
protect its subjects, followed by the deliberate repetition of
treatment which might become the subject of remonstrance. The
untutored mind is not given to subtleties and sophistries; direct
cause and effect are as much as it can grasp. These it does grasp and
firmly hold, and the simple inferences are not to be removed by any
amount of argument or explanation, however plausible. There is
scarcely an Uitlander in the Transvaal who would not view with dismay
the raising of the big question upon such grounds as the treatment of
the natives, the Cape boys, or the Indians; and the fact that the
Transvaal Government know this may account for much of the
provocation on these questions. It is nevertheless undeniable that
white British subjects in the Transvaal do suffer fresh humiliation
and are substantially lowered in the eyes of the coloured races,
because appeals are made on their behalf to the British Government,
and those appeals are useless. The condition of affairs should be
that such appeals would be unnecessary, and would therefore
become--in practice--impossible. Such a condition of affairs would
obtain under a friendly and more enlightened government, and the
only security for the voluntary continuance of such conditions is
the enfranchisement of the Uitlander population.

In the midst of all that was gloomy unfavourable and unpromising
there came to the Uitlanders one bright ray of sunshine. Dr. Leyds
who had been re-elected State Secretary on the understanding that he
would resign immediately in order to take up the post of
plenipotentiary in Europe, and whom the Boers with a growing
anti-Hollander and pro-Afrikander feeling would no longer tolerate,
relinquished his office. In his stead was appointed Mr. F.W. Reitz
formerly President of the Free State, a kindly, honourable, and
cultured gentleman, whose individual sympathies were naturally and
strongly progressive but who, unfortunately, has not proved himself
to be sufficiently strong to cope with President Kruger or to rise
above division upon race lines in critical times. Shortly afterwards
Mr. Christiaan Joubert, the Minister of Mines, a man totally unfit
from any point of view to hold any office of responsibility or
dignity, was compelled by resolution of the Second Volksraad to hand
in his resignation. His place was filled by a Hollander official in
the Mining Department who commanded and still commands the confidence
and respect of all parties. The elevation of the Acting State
Attorney to the Bench left yet another highly responsible post open
and the Government choice fell upon Mr. J.C. Smuts, an able and
conscientious young barrister, and an earnest worker for reform. An
Afrikander by birth and educated in the Cape Colony, he had taken his
higher degrees with great distinction at Cambridge and had been
called to the English Bar.

But there came at the same time another appointment which was not so
favourably viewed. There was still another vacancy on the Bench, and
it became known that, in accordance with the recommendation expressed
by the Raad that all appointments should whenever possible be first
offered to sons of the soil, _i.e._, born Transvaalers, it was
intended to appoint to this judgeship a young man of twenty-four
years of age lately called to the bar, the son of the Executive
Member Kock already referred to in this volume. The strongest
objection was made to this proposal by all parties, including the
friends of the Government; the most prominent of all objectors were
some of the leading members of the bar who, it was believed, carried
influence and were in sympathy with the Government. A delay took
place and it was at one time believed that President Kruger had
abandoned his intention, but it is understood that pressure was
brought to bear upon the President by a considerable party of his
followers, and in the course of a few days the appointment was duly
gazetted.

The selection of educated and intelligent Afrikanders, sincerely
desirous of purifying the administration, for such responsible
offices as those of State Secretary and State Attorney, was
gratefully welcomed by the Uitlander community, who believed that
only through the influence of such men consistently and determinedly
exerted could a peaceful solution of many difficult questions be
found. It is but bare justice to these gentlemen to state that never
were they found wanting in good intention or honest endeavour, ready
at all times to inquire into subjects of complaint, anxious at all
times to redress any legitimate grievances. To them and to many other
less prominent but no less worthy officials of the Transvaal Civil
Service, whom it is impossible to name and to whom it might prove to
be no good turn if they were named, is due an expression of regret
that they may perhaps suffer by references which are not directed
against them but which are justified by a rotten system and are
called for by the action of others over whom these men have no
control. Nobody but one intimately concerned in Transvaal affairs can
appreciate the unpleasant and undeserved lot of the honest official
who necessarily, but most unjustly, suffers by association with those
who deserve all that can be said against them.

It is very well known that the gentlemen above referred to would, if
it were in their power, readily accord the terms asked for in the
franchise memorandum recently submitted by the Uitlanders, but they
are unfortunately entirely without influence over the President and
his party. It is true that--although British subjects by
birth--they have chosen to associate themselves with the Transvaal
Government and are now uncompromising republicans; but there is no
fault to be found with that. It may be true also that they aspire to
republicanize the whole of South Africa, and free it of the Imperial
influence; that would be a cause of enmity as between them and those
who desire to preserve the Imperial connection, but it is no ground
for reproach. There is one point, however, upon which they in common
with nearly all the enlightened Afrikanders throughout South Africa
may be adjudged to have fallen short in their duty; it is this, that
whilst nine times out of ten they divide upon sound principles, they
will not follow that policy to a conclusion; for upon the tenth
occasion they will subordinate principle and, at the call of one who
may use it unscrupulously, will rally upon race lines alone. It is
only too true of only too many that they cannot be got to see that if
they would really divide upon principles all danger of conflict would
disappear and the solution would be both speedy and peaceful; for it
is the division upon race lines that alone raises the distracting
prospect of war.

For those who are in this position in the Transvaal it may be allowed
that their difficulties are great. They cannot, it is true, complain
of lack of warning. They did not, it is also true, after trying their
influence and finding it of no avail, cut adrift when they might have
done so, and by their example have so stripped the reactionaries of
all support that there could now be no question of their standing
out; but they may have honestly believed that they would in time
succeed, whilst the Uitlanders, judging from a long and bitter
experience, felt that they would not and could not. They may say that
this is no time to part from those with whom they associated
themselves in times of peace. Such reasoning may provide an excuse in
the Transvaal, but no such plea will avail for those without the
Transvaal who have let the day of opportunity go past, and who cry
out their frightened protest now that the night of disaster is upon
us.


Footnotes for Chapter X

{42} That President Kruger always contemplated controlling the
Uitlander population by arbitrary methods was proved by the choice of
the site for the Johannesburg fort. This site, on a hill commanding
the town, had been reserved by Government from the commencement, and
when the accommodation in the old gaol proved insufficient and a new
gaol was required it was located on this spot, then a favourite
residential quarter of the town. A deputation of officials waited
upon the President to urge the placing of the new gaol in a more
convenient locality elsewhere. His Honour replied, 'that he did not
care about the convenience. He was going to build the gaol there,
because some day the town would be troublesome and he would want to
convert the gaol into a fort and put guns there before that time
came.' That was at least four years before the Raid.

{43} The writer has since learned from Mr.
Alfred Beit that the same proposal was made to him by Mr. Graaff in
January, 1896, immediately after the Raid, and that it was baited
with the promise that if he and Mr. Rhodes would agree to support it
the threatened 'consequences' of their association with the Raid
would be averted. But they preferred the 'consequences.'

{44} About the middle of 1895 a bad explosion of dynamite occurred
in Germany under circumstances very similar to those of the
Johannesburg accident. An inquiry held by the German authorities
resulted in the finding that the explosion must have been due to
some fault in the dynamite, and an order was issued to destroy the
remainder. The officials charged with this duty found, however, that
the owners, anticipating some such result, had removed it. It was
eventually traced as having been shipped from Antwerp to Port
Elizabeth and thence consigned to the Transvaal in November, 1895.
The Johannesburg explosion occurred in February, 1896. No competent
or independent inquiry was held, although about 100 people were
killed and many more injured.

{45} The gaoler--Du Plessis--in the fulfilment of his promise lost
no opportunity to harass them into submission, by depriving them of
one thing after another, knowing that they would ask for nothing
except as a right. As an instance, the spirit-lamp with which
they made their tea was taken from them on the pretext that no
combustibles were allowed under the prison regulations, and upon a
remonstrance being made by Mr. Conyngham Greene to Dr. Leyds the
latter replied that it was necessary on account of the risk of fire.
For about eight months, therefore, water was to be--and of course
was--their only drink. Only once during the thirteen months did Du
Plessis appear to 'get home.' It was when he proposed that the two
should be separated and sent to out-of-the-way gaols, widely apart
and distant from all friends. Without doubt the conditions told
seriously upon their health, but as both men were endowed with
exceptional physique and any amount of grit they were still able to
take it smiling.

{46} It is described as the Witfontein case. See page 100.

{47} When the case came up again in due course a decision was given
by Mr. Gregorowski, the new Chief Justice, which was regarded by the
plaintiff's advisers as a reversal of the first judgment, and the
practical effect of which was to bring the case under the operations
of Law 1 of 1897--that is to say, to put the plaintiff 'out of court.'
Mr. Brown has appealed to the United States Government for redress.

{48} See Appendix K.




CHAPTER XI.

THE BEGINNING OF THE END.


So the year dragged on with its one little glimmer of light and its
big black clouds of disappointment, and it was Christmas-time when
the spark came to the waiting tinder. What a bloody bill could the
holidays and holy days of the world tot up! On the Sunday night
before Christmas a British subject named Tom Jackson Edgar was shot
dead in his own house by a Boer policeman. Edgar, who was a man of
singularly fine physique and both able and accustomed to take care of
himself, was returning home at about midnight when one of three men
standing by, who as it afterwards transpired was both ill and
intoxicated, made an offensive remark. Edgar resented it with a blow
which dropped the other insensible to the ground. The man's friends
called for the police and Edgar, meanwhile, entered his own house a
few yards off. There was no attempt at concealment or escape; Edgar
was an old resident and perfectly well known. Four policemen came,
who in any circumstances were surely sufficient to capture him.
Moreover, if that had been considered difficult, other assistance
could have been obtained and the house from which there could have
been no escape might have been watched. In any case Edgar was
admitted by the police to have sat on the bed talking to his wife,
and to have been thus watched by them through the window. It is not
stated that they called upon him to come out or surrender himself,
but they proceeded immediately to burst in his door. Hearing the
noise he came out into the passage. He may or may not have known that
they were police: he may or may not have believed them to be the
three men by one of whom he had been insulted. There is not a word of
truth in the statement since made that Edgar had been drinking. It
was not alleged even in defence of the police, and the post-mortem
examination showed that it was not so. A Boer policeman named
Jones (There are scores of Boers unable to speak a word of
English, who nevertheless own very characteristic English, Scotch,
and Irish names--many of them being children of deserters from the
British army!) revolver in hand burst the door open. It is alleged
by the prisoner and one of the police that as the door was burst
open, Edgar from the passage struck the constable on the head
twice with an iron-shod stick which was afterwards produced
in Court. On the other hand Mrs. Edgar and other independent
witnesses--spectators--testified that Edgar did not strike a blow
at all and could not possibly have done so in the time. The fact,
however, upon which all witnesses agree is that as the police
burst open the door Constable Jones fired at Edgar and dropped him
dead in the arms of his wife, who was standing in the passage a
foot or so behind him. On the following morning, the policeman was
formally arrested on the charge of manslaughter and immediately
released upon his comrades' sureties of £200.

As gunpowder answers to the spark so the indignation of the Uitlander
community broke out. The State Attorney to whom the facts were
represented by the British Agent in Pretoria immediately ordered the
re-arrest of the policeman on the charge of murder. The feeling of
indignation was such among British subjects generally, but more
especially among Edgar's fellow-workmen, that it was decided to
present a petition to her Majesty praying for protection. British
subjects were invited to gather in the Market Square in order to
proceed in a body to the office of the British Vice-Consul and there
present the petition, but in order to avoid any breach of the Public
Meetings Act they were requested to avoid speech making and to
refrain in every way from any provocation to disorder. Some four or
five thousand persons gathered together. They listened to the reading
of the petition and marched in an orderly manner to the office of
the British Vice-Consul where the petition was read and accepted.

This was the first direct appeal to her Majesty made by British
subjects since the protests against the retrocession eighteen years
before. Not very many realized at the time the importance of the
change in procedure. There could be no "As you were" after the direct
appeal: either it would be accepted, in which event the case of the
Uitlanders would be in the hands of an advocate more powerful than
they had ever proved themselves to be, or it would be declined, a
course which would have been regarded as sounding the death-knell of
the Empire in South Africa. The time was one of the most intense
anxiety; for the future of the Uitlanders hung upon the turn of the
scale.

It was late one night when those who had been called to Pretoria to
receive the reply of her Majesty's Government returned to the Rand.
The real reply then was known only to three men; it was simply, point
blank refusal to accept the petition. There were no reasons and no
explanations. It was done on the authority of Sir William Butler, the
Commander-in-Chief in South Africa and acting High Commissioner; for
Sir Alfred Milner was at that time in England, as also was Mr.
Conyngham Greene. But the faith was in these men that it could not be
true, that it could not have happened had Sir Alfred Milner not been
absent, and thus came the suggestion to 'explain it away.' On the
following day British subjects on the Rand learned that a breach of
diplomatic etiquette had been committed, that the petition should
never have been published before being formally presented to her
Majesty, and that thus it would be necessary to prepare and present
another in proper form. The petition was redrawn and in the course of
the following weeks upwards of 21,000 signatures were obtained by
that loyal and enthusiastic little band of British subjects who form
the Johannesburg branch of the South African League.

In the meantime other things had been happening. Messrs. Thomas R.
Dodd and Clement Davies Webb had been arrested under the Public
Meetings Act for having organized an illegal meeting in the Market
Square, Johannesburg, for the purpose of presenting the petition to
the British Vice-Consul. They were released upon bail of £1,000
each. Whether this was a fair example of the judicial perspective in
the Transvaal, or whether it was a concession to the feelings of the
Boers it is impossible to say, nor does it much matter. The fact is
that for the crime of killing a British subject the bail was £200;
and for the crime of objecting to it the bail was £1,000. This action
only added fuel to the fire and a public meeting was immediately
convened to be held in a circus building known as the Amphitheatre.
Meetings are permitted under the Act provided they are held in an
enclosed building. The object of the meeting was to record a protest
against the arrest of Messrs. Dodd and Webb. A great many of the more
ardent among the British subjects were of opinion that the time for
protests and petitions was past, and they would not attend the
meeting. A great many others feeling that it was more or less a
formality leading to nothing else, did not trouble to attend. Not one
of those who did attend had the least suspicion of any organized
opposition. The following dispatch from the High Commissioner to the
Secretary of State for the Colonies sufficiently describes the
sequel:--

GOVERNMENT HOUSE, CAPE TOWN,
_April 5, 1899_.

SIR,--I have the honour to forward herewith the certified and
attested copies of affidavits which form an enclosure to Mr. Wyberg's
letter, transmitted to you in my dispatch of the 28th March, but
which did not reach me in time to catch the last mail steamer.

From these affidavits, the number of which and the manner in which
they confirm one another seem to me to leave no doubt of their
general trustworthiness, it appears:

1. That early on the morning of Saturday, the 14th January, the
foremen in charge of the various camps along the Main Reef Road were
instructed to tell a certain number of their workmen to be at the
Amphitheatre in Johannesburg at 2 p.m., where they would be addressed
by an official of the Public Works Department, Mr. P.J. Malan (Hoofd
van Afdeeling Wegen).

2. That the affair had been planned beforehand, and that Acting Road
Inspector Papenfus and others systematically visited the various
camps on that morning in order to beat up recruits, and that inquiry
was made in some cases to ensure that the persons sent should be
'treu,' _i.e._, Boer or Afrikander workmen who might be expected to
take the side of the Government. The Russian workmen were not asked
to go.

3. That the men were paid two hours earlier than usual, and that
those men who were ordered to go were told, if they could not get
Government carts, they should hire and recover afterwards.

4. That in some cases, as that of the Boksburg section, the men were
conveyed the greater part of the way by Government carts.

5. That when the men arrived at the Amphitheatre, about 2 p.m., a man
who was either Mr. Bosman, Second Landdrost's Clerk, or Mr. Boshof,
Registrar of the Second Criminal Court, and perhaps both of them,
told them to go to the Police Station.

6. That on arriving at the Police Station, they were addressed by Mr.
Broeksma, Third Public Prosecutor, and told they were there to break
up the meeting when he gave them certain signals.

7. That they then went into the Amphitheatre, and that there were
present, besides Mr. Broeksma, Mr. Papenfus, Mr. Jacobs, Special Road
Inspector, Mr. de Villiers, Second Public Prosecutor, and Mr.
Burgers, also an official, as well as several prominent members of
the Town and Special Police in plain clothes.

8. That the different sections of the Road party men were placed in
various parts of the building, under their respective foremen, and
that several Government officials assisted in locating them.

9. That a number of the men did not understand what they were there
for.

10. That the proceedings on the part of the promoters of the meeting,
which, as you are aware, had been sanctioned by the Government, were
perfectly regular.

11. That on the first appearance of the promoters of the meeting
there was a concerted disturbance, which rendered it totally
impossible to go on with the proceedings.

12. That in the riot which followed several people were seriously
injured, the sufferers in every case being _bonâ fide_ sympathizers
with the object of the meeting, and the aggressors being persons who
had come there with the object of breaking it up.

13. That the Police did not make the smallest effort to check the
disturbances though it would have been easy to do so, and that, when
appealed to, they maintained an attitude of indifference.

14. That Broeksma, Third Public Prosecutor, and Lieutenant Murphy, of
the Morality Police, actually assisted in breaking chairs, and
encouraged the rioters.

I have, &c.,
A. MILNER,
_Governor and High Commissioner._

With affairs of this kind stirring up race hatred and feeling among
the class from whom the juries have to be selected, what chance was
there of securing an impartial trial of the policeman charged with
the murder of Edgar? The Acting British Agent Mr. Edmund Fraser in
his dispatch of December 23 tells what he thought of the prospect
before these affairs took place. 'As to the ultimate charge to be
brought against the policeman, the State Attorney was doubtful
whether the charge had not better be one of culpable homicide, for
the reason that in the presence of a Boer jury his counsel would have
a much easier task in getting him off under a charge of murder than
for culpable homicide. But the chances of a Boer jury convicting
him at all are so small that I said I should not assent to either
charge until I had seen what rebutting evidence the Public Prosecutor
brought.'

But this was not all. Immediately after the murder of Edgar, Mr. J.S.
Dunn the editor of the _Critic_ newspaper, recited the facts of the
case as they were known to him and passed some severe strictures upon
Dr. Krause, the First Public Prosecutor, who was responsible for
determining the charge against policeman Jones and fixing his bail in
the first instance. The steps now taken by Dr. Krause no doubt were
within his legal rights, but they do not appear to a layman
calculated to ensure justice being done. Before proceeding with the
murder trial Dr. Krause took criminal action against Mr. Dunn for
libel, and in order to prove the libel he, whose duty it was to
prosecute Jones for murder, entered the witness-box and swore that
under the circumstances as known to him he did not consider that
Jones had been guilty of murder, and had therefore faithfully
performed his duty in charging him with the minor offence and
releasing him on bail. Further, he called upon the Second Public
Prosecutor to testify in a similar strain; and finally he directly
and deliberately associated with himself as witness on his side the
man Jones himself who was charged with the murder. All this
ostensibly to prove a paltry libel which could have been dealt with
quite as effectively and infinitely more properly after the trial for
murder had taken place; indeed it is incontestable that the verdict
in the murder trial should properly have been relied upon to a large
extent to determine the gravity of Mr. Dunn's offence. It had
appeared to the British population that the chance of an impartial
trial, with the jury drawn exclusively from the burgher class, was
sufficiently remote without any proceedings so ill considered as
these. The result fulfilled anticipations. In due course the
constable Jones was indicted for culpable homicide and acquitted; and
the presiding judge (Mr. Kock, who as already described had claimed a
judgeship as a 'son of the soil') when discharging the prisoner said,
'With that verdict I concur and I hope that the police under
difficult circumstances will always know how to do their duty.'

After the preliminary examination of Jones the Acting British Agent
had written to the Acting High Commissioner (December 30, 1898): 'I
will only remark that the enclosed report ... seems to show that the
Public Prosecutor (Krause), who has been deeply offended by the slur
cast upon his judgment through the orders from Pretoria to keep the
accused in prison instead of out on bail, was more inclined to defend
than to prosecute and showed an extraordinary desire to incriminate
either the British Vice-Consul or the South African League for what
he termed contempt of court in connection with the publication of
certain affidavits in the _Star_.'