BRONKHORSTSPRUIT.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]
Sin,—Mr. Reginald Statham's amplified account of the dis- tinguished dinner party at Pietermaritzburg, some eighteen years ago, is not in the least convincing on the point at issue. It remains inherently incredible, in the face of the official despatch partly quoted in my letter which appeared in the Spectator of the 7th inst., that Sir Evelyn Wood will accept responsibility for the spoken remark about the Bronkhorst- spruit affair now reported from memory by Mr. Statham. My apology for again trespassing on your space, however, is that Mr. Statham in his second letter goes on to say, apparently in palliation of the conduct of the Boers, that the British commander was himself to blame for what took place, because of neglect to take the proper military precautions. Bat if Colonel Anstruther was too unsuspicious of danger, where does the responsibility chiefly rest ? Let his despatch speak for itself :-
" I had no expectation of meeting the enemy at this spot, as the Field-Cornet had stated in conversation with some of the officers that there was a friendly meeting going on close by, and that emissaries had gone through the country endeavouring to rouse the people to stop us, but that the appeal met with no response."
It thus appears on record that the Boers not only attacked the British detachment while in the act of negotiating with them under a flag of truce, but first of all misled the British officers by assurances of friendliness and safety. The terms of the official despatch are indeed, as Mr. Statham naïvely admits, " very useful in removing false impressions."—I am, Sir, &c., M. [We can print no more letters on this subject. —En. Spectator.]
Previous page
