The general conclusion come to by the Committee is as
follows Upon these facts it would appear that Mr. Rhodes did not direct or approve of Dr. Jameson entering the territory of the South African Republic at the precise time when he -did do so, but the Committee cannot find that that fact relieves Mr. Rhodes from responsibility for the unfortunate occur- rence which took place. Even if Dr. Jameson be primarily responsible for the last fatal step, Mr. Rhodes cannot escape the responsibility of a movement which had been arranged, with his concurrence, to take place at the precise time that it did, if circumstances had been favourable at Johannesburg." Sir T. Uppington, one of the Committee, only signs the general report subject to a minority report, in which he declares that " most cogent evidence would be necessary to -support a conclusion involving the late Prime Minister in the responsibility for the rash act of Dr. Jameson, for not only would such a conclusion amount to finding that the late Prime Minister had been deliberately plotting to subvert the inde- pendence of the South African Republic, but that in acting and by telegraph he had stated what he wished to be read in a manner wholly different from what he intended." The gravity of such a charge, he goes on, cannot be over-estimated, and upon the evidence it is impossible to say that it has been substantiated. Mr. Rhodes was not only without knowledge of Dr. Jameson's intention to move his armed force at the time he did so, but when he became aware of the illegal act, he did all in his power "to prevent a further inroad." His action was in good faith.
Previous page
