Boer Politics Part 1

Boer Politics.

by Yves Guyot.

INTRODUCTION.

A word in explanation of this English edition is perhaps not unnecessary.

It will be remembered that the arguments in the following pages appeared originally in the columns of _Le Siecle_, and from the correspondence between M. Yves Guyot and Dr. Kuyper and M. Brunetiere (Appendix B), the reader will understand how the publication of _Le Siecle_ articles in pamphlet form arose.

In the month of May when M. Yves Guyot's _La Politique Boer_ made its appearance, the supply of literature by more or less competent judges on South African affairs was already so formidable in this country, that an English publication of his pamphlet was apparently not wanted. Moreover, as my master's arguments were written for readers on the continent and not for those of Great Britain, such a publication was not thought of at the time.

Of the first editions of _La Politique Boer_ placed before the reading public in various countries, a few thousand copies were sent to London.

The demand, however, exceeded the supply to such a large extent, and so many letters were received at this office from British readers (unfamiliar with the French language) asking for a translation, that an English dress of _La Politique Boer_ was decided upon.

As the translation was proceeding various incidents of importance in connection with the South African crisis took place. These were commented upon by M. Yves Guyot in _Le Siecle_ and added to the existing pamphlet; the English edition is consequently more up-to-date than the original.

Our thanks for valuable a.s.sistance given in the translation are largely due to Mrs. Ellen Waugh and Mr. Charles Baxter.

M. Yves Guyot has renounced his author's rights, and the profits to _Le Siecle_, resulting from this publication, will be handed in two equal shares to the societies here and in South Africa which represent the interests of the widows and orphans of English and Boer combatants who have given their lives for their countries.

JULES HEDEMAN.

THE LONDON OFFICE OF _Le Siecle_ 32, CHARING CROSS, S.W.

_25th October, 1900._

PREFACE.

THE QUESTION.

I have endeavoured in the following pages to separate the Transvaal question from the many side issues by which it is obscured.

In the "Affaire Dreyfus" I constantly recurred to the main point--Dreyfus was condemned upon the "bordereau"; Dreyfus was not the author of the "bordereau," therefore he was not responsible for the doc.u.ments named in the "bordereau."

In this case, in like manner, there is but one question:--Has or has not the government of the South African Republic acted up to the convention of 1884, and is the English government bound to regard that convention as of no effect with regard to the Uitlanders who have established themselves in the Transvaal on the faith that England would insist upon its being respected?

_Pro-Boer Argument._

Pro-Boers refuse to recognise this point, as did M. Cavaignac when, in his speech of July 7th, 1898, he abandoned the "bordereau" to subst.i.tute for it the Henry forgery.

They keep talking of the Great Trek of 1836; of England's greed; of the gold mines; and, above all, of the Jameson raid. The Jameson raid is their pet grievance; it takes the place of all argument. The Uitlanders may well say that "Jameson has been Kruger's best friend."

Notwithstanding, the Jameson raid is the best proof of the powerlessness of England to protect the interests of her subjects against the pretentions of the Pretoria Government.

In 1894, Lord Ripon had already made ineffectual representations to that Government concerning the contempt with which it was treating the Convention of 1884.

The Uitlanders had approached the Volksraad in a pet.i.tion signed by 14,800 persons. The pet.i.tioners did not ask that the Republic should be placed under the control of the British Government; on the contrary, they postulated the maintenance of its independence; all that they asked was for "equitable administration and fair representation." This pet.i.tion was received with angry contempt. "Protest, protest as much as you like," said Mr. Kruger, "I have arms, and you have none."

It is contended that if President Kruger did provide himself to a formidable extent with munitions of war, it was not until after the Jameson Raid.

Here the connexion between cause and effect is not very clear; Jameson once beaten there was no further cause to arm against him. But from the Uitlanders' pet.i.tion, to which allusion has been made, it is evident that armaments had begun before. Among the alleged grievances we find the following:--

"A policy of force is openly declared against us; 250,000 have been expended on the construction of forts; upon one alone, designed to terrorise the inhabitants of Johannesburg, 100,000 has been spent. Large orders have been given to Krupp for big guns and maxims; and it is said that German Officers are coming to drill the burghers."

The Uitlanders of Johannesburg treated with contumely, adopted the theories made use of by the Boers in their Pet.i.tion of Rights of February 17th, 1881, by which they justified their insurrection against British rule, of December, 1880.

"Then the cause was unexpectedly helped on by the courageous resistance of O. Bezuidenhout against the seizure of his household effects for non-payment of taxes. Here was a breach of the law easy to lay hold of; here was a crime indeed! It was illegal, undoubtedly, but illegal in the same sense as was the refusal of Hampden to pay the four or five s.h.i.+llings "s.h.i.+p money"; the taking of den Briel by the Watergeuzen (Waterbeggars) in 1572; as was the throwing overboard of a cargo of tea in Boston; as was the plot in Cape Colony against the importation of convicts. All these acts were illegal, but of such are the illegalities in which a people takes refuge, when a Government fails in its duty to a law higher than that of man."

In virtue of the principles invoked by the Boers, the Johannesburg Uitlanders entered into a conspiracy; Jameson was to come to their aid after they had risen. Messrs. Leonard and Phillips put themselves in communication with Cecil Rhodes. He listened to their manifesto, and the instant they came to the mention of free trade in South Africa, he said: "That will do for me." The supposition that he desired to annex the Transvaal is absurd.[1] He has admitted that he gave his personal co-operation to Jameson without having first consulted his colleagues of the Chartered Company. Jameson was to have gone to the a.s.sistance of the Uitlanders; not to forestall the insurrection, which was fixed for January 4th. On December 29th, Jameson invaded the Transvaal with 480 men. They got as far as Krugersdorp, about 31 miles distant from Johannesburg, and after a fight at Doornkop, in which the Raiders'

losses were 18 killed and 40 wounded, and on the Boers' side four killed and five wounded, they surrendered on the condition that their lives should be spared.

That stipulation is forgotten when we fall to admiring President Kruger's magnanimity in handing over Jameson to the British Government.

[Footnote 1: Fitzpatrick. "The Transvaal from Within." p. 122.]

_The Profits from the Jameson Raid._

The trial by the Government of Pretoria of the sixty-four members of the "Reform Committee" was held in Johannesburg. Four of them, Mr. Lionel Phillips, Colonel Rhodes, Mr. George Farrar, and Mr. Hammond were condemned to death. The remainder were sentenced to two years'

imprisonment and 2,000 fine, or failing payment, to another year's imprisonment and three years' banishment. The Executive reserved to themselves the right to confiscate their property.

In commutation of the four death sentences, the Government exacted 100,000; fifty-six other prisoners paid in a sum of 112,000. One of the accused died, another who had pleaded not guilty, was so ill that his sentence was not carried out; Messrs. Sampson and Davies refused to pay the fine. The British Government left Mr. Kruger a free hand in the matter; it cannot be reproached with having interposed on their behalf--although it was its own representatives who persuaded the Johannesburg conspirators to deliver up their arms. In the moment of danger many and various hopes were held out by Mr. Kruger in his proclamation of December 30th, 1895. The danger once past, the promises were forgotten. He remembered the Jameson Raid only as an excuse for demanding an indemnity of 677,938 3s. 6d. for material damages, and a further 1,000,000 for damages "moral and intellectual."

In February, 1896, Mr. Chamberlain proposed to him "the autonomy of that portion occupied by mining industries" (see details of the proposal, letter of Mr. Chamberlain, published in _Le Siecle_, July 5th, 1899.) Mr. Kruger refused contemptuously. At the same time he got the Volksraad to pa.s.s a bill giving him the right to expel any foreigner, at his discretion, at a fortnight's notice. Mr. Chamberlain reminded him that this bill was contrary to Act 14 of the Convention of 1884. Kruger took no notice of this remonstrance, and the bill became law on October 24th.

In December, 1896, Mr. Chamberlain made a renewed protest.

The correspondence continued. Mr. Chamberlain recapitulated the breaches of the Convention of 1884 committed by the Boer Government. In the summer of 1897, the act was at last repealed, but always with the unavowed intention of re-enacting it in another form.

Mr. Kruger persistently continued to refuse all demands for reform, becoming more and more insolent, while, thanks to the wealth brought to the exchequer by the gold mines, he continued to increase the very armaments against which the pet.i.tioners of 1894 had protested.

To all representations, his answer was "The Jameson Raid." To all Europe, his plea was "The Jameson Raid." If you mention Transvaal affairs to a Pro-Boer, he shuts you up at once with "what about the Jameson Raid?" He will listen to no arguments; and loses his temper. If you suggest that the Jameson Raid bears a certain a.n.a.logy to the expedition of Garibaldi's One Thousand, he gazes at you with amazement.

If you proceed to remark that the Jameson Raid took place at the close of the year 1895; that we are now in 1900; that it is _res judicata_; that the British Government left Boer Justice a free hand to deal with the conspirators, he accuses you of having been bought by England. Not a whisper, of course, is heard about the millions of secret service money placed at the disposal of Dr. Leyds.

_The Logical Consequences of the Jameson Raid._

According to the Boers, they are briefly: (1) The Jameson Raid of Dec.

29th, 1895, gives the South African Republic the right in perpetuity to regard the Convention of 1884 as null and void. (2) The Jameson Raid gives the Government of the South African Republic the right to treat all Uitlanders, especially the British, as Boers treat Kaffirs. (3) The Jameson Raid gives the Government of the South African Republic an undefined and perpetual right to plunder the Uitlanders.

YVES GUYOT.