The Transvaal from Within Part 21

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 a.s.sociate 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 a.s.sociated 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 a.s.sociation 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 circ.u.mstances 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, antic.i.p.ating some such result, had removed it. It was eventually traced as having been s.h.i.+pped 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 hara.s.s 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 b.l.o.o.d.y 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 circ.u.mstances were surely sufficient to capture him. Moreover, if that had been considered difficult, other a.s.sistance 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 pa.s.sage. 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 pa.s.sage 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 pa.s.sage 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 pet.i.tion 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 pet.i.tion, 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 pet.i.tion and marched in an orderly manner to the office of the British Vice-Consul where the pet.i.tion 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 pet.i.tion. 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 pet.i.tion 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 pet.i.tion 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 pet.i.tion 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 pet.i.tions 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 Sat.u.r.day, 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 a.s.sisted 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 bona 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 att.i.tude of indifference.

14. That Broeksma, Third Public Prosecutor, and Lieutenant Murphy, of the Morality Police, actually a.s.sisted 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 cla.s.s 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 a.s.sent to either charge until I had seen what reb.u.t.ting 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 pa.s.sed 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 circ.u.mstances 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 a.s.sociated 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 cla.s.s, was sufficiently remote without any proceedings so ill considered as these. The result fulfilled antic.i.p.ations. In due course the constable Jones was indicted for culpable homicide and acquitted; and the presiding judge (Mr. k.o.c.k, who as already described had claimed a judges.h.i.+p as a 'son of the soil') when discharging the prisoner said, 'With that verdict I concur and I hope that the police under difficult circ.u.mstances 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.'

That was indeed the position. In this as in the Cape Boys case (the Lombaard inquiry) the aim of the prosecution appeared to be to prove that the British Vice-Consul had investigated and reported cases of injustice suffered by British subjects; and the establishment of such proof seemed to be considered a sufficient and triumphant answer to the original complaint. Such action drew the following spirited protest from Mr. Emrys Evans to the British Agent: 'He (Krause) seems generally to suppose that I have no right to do anything in the way of a.s.sisting British subjects, and that my action as Vice-Consul is nothing more nor less than officious meddling.' That well describes the position of Great Britain's representative in the Transvaal, and it has been the same for so many years that among the Uitlanders it creates no feeling of surprise; but imagine the representative of-let us say-the United States being so treated!

While these matters were proceeding an opportunity occurred to raise fresh funds for the Uitlander Education Council. The scheme had been perilously near collapse on several occasions, but by a little generous and timely help actual abandonment had been averted. The possibility of a return of better times had been foreseen by some of those interested in education, and the appeals which were made in the months of February and March resulted in raising a fund of over 100,000. The companies were also applied to for a.s.sistance in the form of annual grants for maintenance; and guarantees were given amounting in all to about 16,000 a year. A final effort was made by the Government party and the allies of Dr. Mansvelt, the Superintendent of Education, to show that the Government had made ample provision for the education of English-speaking children, and that the Uitlanders' scheme was unnecessary. Even Mr. Reitz, the State Secretary, it is to be regretted, undertook a public defence of the system which he has frequently expressed his disapproval of; but the more favourable construction which he endeavoured to place upon the law was immediately removed by a plain statement from the President to the exact contrary effect.

The Uitlanders consider that, if the intentions of the Government were as good as they desire them to be thought, firstly, they should not object to have the conditions permanently established and not leave them liable to alteration at the sweet will of the Superintendent, as they are to-day; and secondly, as there has been nothing to hinder the carrying out of benevolent intentions-had they existed-there is no reason why there should be five or six thousand Uitlander children without any facilities for education in their own language except such as are provided by private enterprise or charity. And this is so; notwithstanding the expenditure by the State of nearly a quarter of a million per annum, ostensibly upon education, nine-tenths of which sum is contributed by the Uitlander population.

The spirit in which the State aid is given and the aim which the Government have in view are entirely revealed in the conditions, a brief reference to which will be sufficient.

The Government capitation grant of 4 per annum may be earned on the conditions:-

(a) That the child be over six years of age.

(b) That it shall have a sufficient knowledge of the Dutch language and South African history.

(c) That it be not the child of Dutch or Hollander parents.

(d) That a qualified Dutch teacher must be retained by the school.

The first condition excludes all the children of the kindergarten schools, and also a cla.s.s who form a considerable percentage in the elementary schools. The third condition excludes all those who have in early years any chance of satisfying the inspectors under the second condition. Obviously the amount earned by the few who would satisfy all the conditions could not possibly pay for the salary of a Dutch teacher. It was an actual experience in several schools that the acceptance of State aid involved a direct loss; a good example of the 'something for nothing' policy.

English is permitted to be the medium of instruction in Government schools on the conditions, among others-

That Dutch be taught for one hour a day during the first year, two hours a day during the second year, three hours a day during the third year; and that in the fourth year Dutch shall become the sole medium of instruction.