1871. following year a Bill annexing Basutoland to Cape Colony was passed by the Cape Parliament.1

Relations Whilst the relations between the British Government and with the Orange Free State were thus becoming more and more Transvaal. strained, separate causes of trouble were at work in the Transvaal. We have already noted the character of the government. "It was," writes Theal, of the years 1854 to 1857, "so weak that to many persons it must seem a misnomer to call it a government at all. Practically it had no revenue. There was no police, yet there was very little crime, and neither person nor property was in danger, except from tribes of Africans." A remedy was hoped from the formal adoption of a Constitution in 1856. The proceedings of the Potschefstrom delegates were at once, however, met with protests from the Lydenburg and Zoutpansberg districts, and an independent Lydenburg Republic was proclaimed. Nor were things made better when nominal union was secured. In 1861 we find civil war imminent, two acting Presidents and two rival Governments. Indeed, anarchy was only averted by the determined measures of Mr Paul Kruger, and even then peace was not obtained without civil bloodshed, nor a satisfactory settlement arrived 1864. at until May 1864. "The treasury," Mr Theal writes, " was empty, and salaries were in arrear; taxes of all kinds were outstanding and practically irrecoverable. The Republic had lost the confidence of the outside world, no one any longer believed in its stability."

3

Such being the condition of affairs in the Transvaal, we need not be surprised at the reported occurrences which startled the conscience of Englishmen and did much to foster ill-feeling against the Boers. From more than one quarter it was reported that it was the practice for Boers to kidnap destitute native children and to sell them into virtual slavery, though the proceedings were termed "appren

1 After the long and troublesome war, which arose out of the attempt to enforce the Disarmament Act, it was separated from the Cape Colony in 1884 and became a Crown Colony.

"Hist. of S. Africa, 1854-1872, p. 25.

It

ticing." It must, I think, be admitted that from the time of Lord Glenelg downwards a strong undercurrent of prejudice against the Dutch is to be observed in the behaviour of the British Colonial Office, a prejudice which is remarkably apparent in the cool and sober Lord Blachford. I cannot find that there is any trustworthy evidence to connect the Transvaal authorities with any acts of direct cruelty. At the same time, when the central Government was virtually an anarchy, it was not likely that the acts of the more reckless and lawless Boers would be held in check, while there can be no question but that public opinion in the Transvaal regarded offences against the natives in a very different light from what they were regarded in England. For better or for worse, upon the whole for worse, the Boers belonged to another generation, and to other modes of thought. was impossible to apply New Testament codes of morality to a people which belonged to the Old:-it is something really to hold by any code at all.-Admirers of the Boers would have done well to rest content with such general considerations. Mr Theal, however, carries the case further, and appears to hold that it was fortunate for the children to exchange their native custodians for Boer masters. does not, however, attempt to deal with what was really the ugly feature in the matter. How came it, it was asked, but never, I believe, answered, that while in their frontier wars the English had never come across these numerous orphan destitute children, wherever the Boers went they became of importance? The theory was that they were the children of natives whose parents had been victims in war, but there were suspicious circumstances pointing to the conclusion that in some cases at least the manufacture of orphans by the Boers had become a regular trade. Be this as it may, the Transvaal Government appears honestly to have endeavoured to stop the evil by rendering illegal the sale of such children. They admitted the existence of isolated cases, but denied in toto that they in any way tolerated the trade. Much correspondence took place about the matter. The 1 Hist. of S. Africa, 1854-1872, p. 154.

He

Foreign Office was put in motion, and appealed to the Colonial Office. Sir P. Wodehouse, who was no friend of the Boers, put little faith in their denials. At the same time he insisted that there was no way of arriving at the truth, and that idle protests, which could not be enforced, were a mere waste of words.

While the Boers were thus arousing against them that philanthropic sentiment which has always been of such power especially with the great middle classes, a Proclamation1 of their President in 1868 excited the indignation of those who maintained that in spite of the failures and errors of the past, Great Britain must be still the paramount Power in South Africa. The boundaries of the Republic were largely extended on the north, west, and east. On the east the claim was put forward to access to the sea in the direction of Delagoa Bay. Whatever may have been the vague expressions of Mr Owen or the tacit agreements of Sir G. Clerk, considerations both of native rights and of Imperial responsibilities barred the way to the admission of such claims, and Sir P. Wodehouse at once notified to Mr Pretorius that the Proclamation must be withdrawn. The Transvaal Government yielded, but no doubt with sullen discontent, and it was in this atmosphere of mutual distrust and dislike that the parties were living, who, within a few years, were to become closely linked, and then again rudely divorced, with consequences so disastrous to the good name of England, to the character of the Transvaal administration, and to the well-being of South Africa generally. Already in the sixties, in the claim of the South African Republic to have its Consul at Berlin, in the loose boasting about an Afrikander nation, we see the answer of history to the challenge of Lord Glenelg for the future to decide between him and Sir B. D'Urban. The wellmeaning caution of the Colonial Office and its determined resistance to a policy of expansion had already hatched the egg from which it is not yet clear whether there may not emerge a cockatrice to British South Africa.

1 Parl. Pap., 1868-9.

Republic, unhappily we do not find ourselves in much less Question

mond

Returning to the affairs of the more enlightened southern Orange Free State. troubled waters. It has been already seen that, whatever of Diamay be said in favour of the annexation of Basutoland from fields. an Imperial point of view, the manner and time of annexation was such as grievously to wound the Free State burghers. It is the Nemesis which waits upon the renunciation of duties, that generally lost ground has to be made good at the most inopportune moment. But, bad as appeared the business of the annexation of Basutoland, the manner in which Great Britain acquired the Diamond Oct. 1871. fields seemed infinitely worse. It is impossible in a general sketch to deal with the complicated details of this difficult question. It would appear, if we may trust the authority of Mr Theal, that the title of Waterboer, through whom the English claimed, was bad, though the sum of £90,000 afterwards paid by Lord Carnarvon to the Orange Free State was paid 2 without prejudice to the rights of the case. But whatever might be abstract rights, here again the fact remained that the real justification for annexation lay in the responsibilities involved by the position of the paramount Power. Lord Kimberley caused needless irritation by a despatch wherein he stated that "Her Nov. 17, Majesty's Government would see with great dissatisfaction 1870. any encroachment on the Griqua Territory by those Republics, which would open to the Boers an extended field for their slave-dealing operations, and probably lead to much oppression of the natives and disturbance of peace." But an inkling of the true position of affairs leaked out in the peremptory refusal to admit of the reference of the dispute. to the head of some foreign country, than which, if the South African Republics were really in all senses independent of Great Britain, no proposal could have been more reasonable.* 1 See ch. xiv. of Hist. of S. Africa, 1854-1872. Mr Theal is careful not to express an opinion, but he leaves no doubt as to his views.

2 Parl. Pap., 1876..

3

3 Parl. Pap., 1871.

4 On July 20, 1871, Lord Kimberley wrote-" It seems to me that to admit the action of foreign Powers in these South African questions might lead to very serious embarrassments."

In truth, the respect which gave Lord Kimberley pause was in no wise the rights of the Orange Free State, but the importance of not being "a party to the annexation of any territory which the Cape Colony would be unable to govern and defend by its own unaided resources." "1 May 18, Assuredly "not without reluctance," he agreed to accept 1871. the cession offered by Waterboer, if only the Cape Parliament would bind itself to undertake the responsibility of government and the maintenance of any force which might be necessary. The attitude of the Cape Parliament on the question brought out very clearly the standing danger of South African politics. There was general agreement that the acquisition of the Diamond fields would be of advantage to Cape Colony, and that it was advisable to accept anything that Waterboer could really cede, but there was a strong disinclination to interfere in any way with the rights of the Orange Free State, and a desire to postpone the consideration of the question till the legal position of the parties could be determined. The utmost that Sir H. Barkly could obtain was the adoption of a proposition sanctioning measures for the maintenance of order 2 pending the adjustment of the boundary disputes.

Nov. 4,

Formal possession was taken on the 4th of November 1871. 1871. Lord Kimberley had been careful to explain that, whilst it July 24, seemed necessary "to accept Waterboer's proffer of allegi1871. ance in order to prevent the disorders which must result from the prolonged absence of a settled government at the diamond diggings, . . . the question of limits should be determined with due regard to the claims of the Free State." For this purpose he again proposed arbitration by another servant of the Queen. President Brand protested, but in vain. We may note, too, the language of the Volksraad: "Few in number, and surrounded by hostile and powerful coloured tribes, these white inhabitants were reluctant to take its government upon themselves, but, constrained by Her Majesty's Plenipotentiary, . . . they accepted the government of this terri1 Despatch, Jan. 3, 1871. Parl. Pap., 1871.

2 Sir H. Barkly to Lord Kimberley, Aug. 15, 1871. Parl. Pap., 1872.