On Tuesday Mr. Chamberlain received a deputation of Members of
Parliament and others interested in Swaziland, with reference to the alleged grievances against the Boers. Mr. Howard Langston, "Chief Secretary for the Swazi nation representatives," said that he was deputed by the Swazi King and nation to repudiate the right of the Boers to govern in Swaziland. The claim of the Boers to collect the hut-tax would be resisted by force. The Swazis desired a Commission to define the rights of the Swazis, and the Boers should be prevented "from commandeering, or using enforced labour, or maintaining an armed force in Swaziland." Mr. Chamberlain's treatment of this difficult question was most statesmanlike and tactful. He began by frankly declaring that the question of the Convention could not be re-opened. In Colonial, as in foreign policy, the principle of con- tinuity must be observed. As to the wisdom of annexation he could pronounce no opinion. He did not think it was- contrary to the Convention for the Boers to collect the hut. tax. Protecting native rights was very difficult, because unfortunately the Swazis appear to have parted with their rights. As to the alleged grievances connected with com- mandeering, instances must be given. On the whole, Mr._ Chamberlain gave the deputation the only possible answer, namely, that the Convention must be respected. "I must ask you in conclusion to believe that while the deputation must accept the fait aecompli, and must not discuss the- principles of a policy which was finally adopted by my pre- decessor, yet I shall at all times be perfectly ready to listen to any complaints, properly authenticated, of any breach of the Convention which has been made by the Boers." Very properly Mr. Chamberlain refused to listen to anonymous complaints as to the action of the Boers, or to receive the names in private.
Previous page
