TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE CRISIS IN SOUTH AFRICA.
THE news from South Africa is undoubtedly most serious. It is not only that the Bloemfontein Conference has proved a failure. What is worse than the fact of the break- down in the negotiations is the spirit in which Presi- dent Kruger dealt with the question of franchise re- form. As a redress of grievances, the proposal to give the vote only after seven years' residence, and then only to persons with £200 a year, cannot be taken seriously. The object is to secure peace and tranquillity to the Transvaal by giving their fair share in the government to the majority of the population, and so to place the integrity and independence of the Republic on a firm basis. But it is impossible to say that such a result can be obtained by the President's franchise proposals. That being so, it seems hardly worth while to discuss at length the other con- ditions required by the President, but a word may be said on the matter. The President insists that all his proposals " should be subject to the acceptance by the British Govern- ment of the principle of arbitration on the differences between the two countries." If this means, as we fear it must, that arbitration is to take place as between two equal and absolutely sovereign Powers, it cannot be entertained for a moment. We are the suzerain or paramount Power, and the Transvaal stands towards us in the relation of a depen- dent, protected, or feudatory State. The Transvaal is endowed, no doubt, with the very highest degree of self- government compatible with the paramountcy of another State ; but nevertheless, as the history of the London Con- vention and the control enjoyed by us over the foreign rela- tions of the Republic show, we possess what is equivalent to a protectorate. But this fact, though it prevents arbitration in the form of arbitration between us and, say, Germany, does not, of course, forbid us to refer matters in dispute to a judicial or quasi-judicial body for decision. If an agree- ment for:arbitration were prefaced by an explicit recital as to our paramount rights, and as to there being no intention to modify existing conditions, we might with perfect propriety, and without endangering our rights, agree as to some form of arbitration. It has always seemed to us that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council would prove an ideal body for the consideration of disputed points between us and the Transvaal, and especially since the addition to that body of Colonial Judges. We believe that a Court consisting of three Colonial Chief Justices would prove a most competent Tribunal. The maintenance at once of our Imperial position in South Africa and'of South African local rights is 'essen- tially a problem for the Empire as a whole, and we would gladly see the matter referred to a body of Colonial Judges. We hold that we must maintain our position in South Africa, not Out of the lust of territory or for any material advantage to these islands, but as a great Imperial trust, and we would gladly see Britain beyond the sea associated in our dealings with the Transvaal.
It is, however, we fear, of little use to debate so abstract a proposal as this at the present moment. The main ques- tion to be considered is what is to be done next,—How are we to meet the grave situation created by the breakdown of the Bloemfontein Conference ? In the first place, we desire to express our earnest hope that not only the Govern- ment, but the nation as a whole, will approach the subject in the spirit in which Mr. Balfour approached it in his :leon Wednesday. Nothing could have been better cthe tone of that speech. It was grave, it was resolute, it was without any fussy anxiety, and yet it showed a sense of fairness and generosity towards the Transvaal which should be shown by the whole nation. But, best of all, it was calm and hopeful in tone. Readers of modern history will remember how, when England was getting into a state of fever-heat over the Reform agitation, Sydney Smith may be said, with very little exaggeration, to • have saved the situation by his assurance that " we shall beat Mrs. Parting- ton." Mr. Balfour was not so witty in words, but his serenity had, we believe, the same intention and the same belief behind it as had the words of Sydney Smith. The Boers, like the Lords in 1832, are taking up an impossible position, and, like the Lords also, they will be obliged to yield; bnt this is not a reason for 'any hasty, or violent, or fussy action on the part of England. The Empire is the Atlantic, and President Kruger is only Mrs. Partington with her mop. It may be a disagreeable fact that Mrs. Parting- ton will insist upon keeping up the fight, but there can only be one end.
But after all metaphors do not take the place of argu- ment. It may very naturally, be said that something more specific is required than the general advice to keep cool and remember Mrs. Partington. We agree.: something more specific is required. In addition to the maintenance of a calm and fair-minded spirit, and to the wholesome know- ledge that Mrs. Partington never in the end beats the' Atlantic, we would make our position as to the situation that has arisen in the Transvaal quite clear. We would, that is, point out to the Transvaal Government in the - plainest possible terms what are likely to be the'consequences of their refusal to act generously, and also wisely, in the matter of the franchise. We would begin by admitting fully that the rejection of the franchise proposals does not constitute a casus belli, and that we cannot claim to take action upon their refusal to give the Outlanders the vote. But.we ought thereupon to warn them that hereafter we shall hold them responsible for any bonii-fide outbreak of disorder which may occur in Johannesburg, and that we shall scrutinise all their repressive measures with the utmost closeness, fully intending to afford all possible protection to British subjects. In fact, we should warn the Transvaal Government that as they would not put their house in order in the only way in which good government can permanently be secured, the blame for any breakdown of their system will be visited" on them, and they will not be allowed to plead the turbulence of British subjects as an excuse for repressive acts. British subjects, that is, cannot be held responsible by us for protesting vigorously against their 'exclusion from all share in the government of the Republic. It may be said, no doubt, that to state such a view publicly as this would be to incite British subjects to be rebellious, and to promise them support in the event of a rising. It would, that is,, be in effect_ a declaration We have not got a casus belli yet, but if you the British subjects in the Transvaal, will give 'us one; we will act upon it.' No doubt there would be a danger of such an interpretation, but if so, the responsibility rests again upon President Kruger, and not upon the British Govern- ment. Those who after due warning persist in trying to keep power in the hands of a minute oligarchy must take the consequences. To recapitulate, then. We would warn the Transvaal most solemnly and formally that by rejecting Sir Alfred Milner's proposals for a reform of the franchise they have incurred 'a great and heavy responsibility, and one which we shall enforce to the uttermost. We are the para- mount Power, the constable who keeps watch in South Africa, and we cannot and will not tolerate .a -condition of perpetual unrest. We do not want to interfere with the autonomy of the Transvaal, but autonomy' must not mean disorder. Here we would leave matters for as long as we can. If, of course, the Transvaal can manage to show that a pyramid will stand on its apex, and that the Boer oligarchy can rule the State efficiently and well in the future, there will be no need to take any further steps. If, however, things henceforth go from bad to worse, the rejection of the franchise proposals will ve us the right to take strong action on Outlanders. THE side of the
Previous page
