THE SHOOTING OF MR. McLACHLAN.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE 'SPECTATOR."] SIR,—The shooting of Mr. McLachlan at Harrismith is a shocking incident, if confirmed, but your comments are hardly justified on the facts. If Mr. McLachlan had taken the oath making him a burgher of the Orange Free State, he was as liable to be shot for refusing to fight as any one of our soldiers would be. Of course, if he was not a burgher, the affair was a murder pure and simple. The Dutch residents in Cape Colony take no oath of (contingent) military service, so your comparison altogether fails. Of course, this will not be published in your (now unfortunately) partisan paper, but it may give the writer of the paragraph something to think of.—I am, Sir, &c., ALFRED WILSON. 1S Gracechurch Street, E.C.
[Our correspondent shows a spirit unfortunately only too common among the peace party. His remarks are, however, entirely free from the brutalities and obscenities which mark the effusions of some of our more violent correspondents on the Boer side—why violent pro-Boer sentiments should so often be infused with such qualities, we cannot even conceive, but such is the case—and we therefore gladly publish his letter. As readers whose eyes are not dimmed with prejudice must know, we have taken special pains to find room for letters challenging our own views in decent language. Our correspondent is wrong as to there being no analogy between Cape Colony British subjects and Free State burghers. Every subject of the Queen is, in theory, liable to be called to arms. But rightly, that liability is never enforced against the Cape Dutch in the case of war with their own kith and kin. We may add that we note with great satisfaction that, the shooting of Mr. McLachlan is denied, and we sincerely trust and hope that the denial will prove well founded.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
