The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-16 00:00:00

object was not to put an end to the present policy,
but to remove obstructions to its working.—(Hear,
bear.) The distinction between the two propositions
in this respect was marked by the omission in the
Noble Lord's of such words as " definitive adjustment."
But the Noble Lord's proposition differed from his (Alr.
Adderley's) not only in the purpose and object, but also
in the mode of inquiry. The Noble Lord proposed a
Select Committee of Inquiry, instead of a Commission
on the spot. A Select Committee must consume a con-
siderable time. They would have before them a variety
of theories—from military men, from philanthropic men,
and from economic men—and before the terminatinn of
the inquiry the object would be fatally lost in its ex-
tent. A third proposition, that of the Hon. Baronet
the Member for Southwark, was also before the House.
That Hon. Member thought that this country neither
needed nor ought to institute an inquiry, as he wished
to throw the responsibility of the future policy on the
Executive here ; but it should be considered that the
Executive had confessed its inability to act practically ;
and, therefere, that proposition threw the responsibility
on the colony. That was scarcely consistent with the
justice, honour, and dignity of this country. After this
country had framed a policy of its own, which indeed
had caused infinite disturbance and confusien on the
spot, this country was bound in honour to wind up and
finish that policy before it threw on the colony the
task of instituting a new policy. That was the objec-
tion he had to the Hon. Baronet's proposition, but
though he saw the objection to it in point of justice, yet
he admitted it to be an effectual proposition ; and, if
not able to carry his own, he should prefer it to the
Noble Lord's proposition, With regard to his own pro-
position, the circumstances which in his mind rendered
inquiry necessary were—first, the apparently endless
recurrence of wars on the frontier, utterly destructive to
the colony, to the property and welfare of the colonists,
and not leading to the civilization or subjugation of the
savage tribes, but attended with enormous expense to
this country; and, secondly, the prolonged deference
of the concession of representative government; and
thirdly, not so much the encroachment on the native
tribes as the vacillation manifested in our frontier policy.
With regard to the concession of constitutional powers, he
hoped that the Government would not much longer allow
its promises to be obstructed by officials on the spot, and
that it would abide by its own enlightened intentions,
rather than allow itself to be frustrated by officials on
the spot. With regard to encroachment on the native
tribes, he should say that the most dangerous character
of our policy was its vacillating character. The system
of encroachment, variable and uncertain, at one time
letting the Kafirs into their own country, and then driv-
ing them out of it, was neither vigorous, just, nor chari-
table. It had been said by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Hawes) it was not fair to accuse an absent man, and more
especially an absent governor, during war. He agreed
in that as well as in Lord Torrington'e observations that
the Government should have recalled him when the Cey-
lon Committee was appointed, and he (Mr. Adderle) )
hoped Sir EL Smith would be recalled, if the Noble
Lord succeeded in getting his Committee en the affairs
of Kafraria. But Sir H. Smith, when he went out to
the Cape, with the analogy of India in his mind, laid
down a gigantic scheme of encroachment, to be regulated
by the natural features of the country. He called the
chiefs together, and, notwithstanding the remoestrances
of some of his advisers, he said he had a plan of his own,
and forthwith proceeded to frame a treaty, in which the
advantages were all on his side, and the loss of ter-
ritory all on the aide of the Kafirs. For the first time
in our colonial history he introduced a form of Govern-
ment called a " Military Commission," of which he re-
ported in 1849 that it was perfectly successful in keeping
tranquillity. But in October, 1850, he reported the
existence of what he called " restlessness" in Kafraria,
and in that singular confidential kingdom, which had
been created between Sir Harry Smith and Lord
Grey, and of which no one else in the country, from
her Majesty down, knew anything whatever. This
" restlessness" ho attributed to famine among the
tribes, and to the existence of wizards, and he pro-
posed to suppress it by deposing some of the chiefs, by
pensioning others, and by turning the wizards into ridicule.
But imprisoning chiefs did not destroy the allegiance of
their tribes, and if any of them deserved pensions they
should have received them before. A national superstition
had never yet been put down by ridicule, and when Sir H.
Smith tried to put his plan into opt retion he found he
was imprisoned instead of the chiefs, and even now he
was imprisoned though at the head of 5,000 men, with
a whole nation in arms around him. Lord Grey would
take no information from any person but Sir H. Smith,
though he had been warned several times, and Sir H.
Smith had told a gentleman who knew the people, and
wished to warn him of what was coming, " I understand
the matter better than you do; mind your own business."
He still talked of the fidelity of Pato and some other
chiefs, but Pato was only shamming, as in the last war,
and was biding his time to take the side of the strongest.
The massacre of the six military villages, filled with
people unable to defend the colony or themselves, must
be a painful matter to Lord Grey, but it was to be feared
more blood would be yet shed in a similar way. The
war was very serious, and not likely to be put down
as soon as the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Hawes)
seemed to think. It was not a war of plunder, but for
the recovery of lost territory; not against the Governor
of the Cape, but against the High Commissioner for
Kafraria, and the real wizard who excited it was Sir
Harry Smith. The authority of the chiefs had been
destroyed, as Lord Grey had pointed out, but Sir H.
Smith bad not succeeded in substituting his own. Ilis
system would be successful if it could be carried out, but
this country would never permit it, for it was in fact ex-
termination. The only other system was to recognize
the nationality of the tribes, and gradually to elevate
them by the influences of civilization; but the Governor
had fallen between the former and the latter. The only
question that remained was, what course must now be
pursued? In the first place the war must be finished.
Next, he proposed they should adopt the course indicated
in the motion, for which he had a precedent in the course
taken in 1827, when a commissioner was sent out to the
colony. Though the Hon. Baronet's (Sir W. Moles-
worth's) policy might be wanting in justice, he preferred
it to that of the Government. The Hon. Member con-
cluded by moving, "That an humble address be pre-
sented to her Majesty, praying that she would be gra-
ciously pleased to appoint one or more Commissioners,
with instructions to proceed to South Africa, to inquire
and report as to the best mode of adjusting the relations
between this country and the Kafir tribes; and also of
determining the engagements entered into by her Ma-
jesty's High Commissioner in his settlement of the ex-
tended territory."

Lord J. RUSSELL rose to propose an amendment.
He owned he could have wished the Hon. Member had
kept his promise not to cast blame on Sir Harry Smith,
because, instead of investigating the cause of the present
war, be had contented himself with making allegations
against that Gallant Officer and Lord Grey. It was,
however, more desirable to look to the general interests
of the country and to the position of the colony, as to
which they had a very serious question to determine. In
looking back to the history of that colony it would be
found, that when the Dutch were in possession of it
they had not confined themselves to Cape Town, but
had extended their possession to Fish River. The co-
lony was in that state when we first came there, and our
officers employed their care and attention in endea-
vouring to reconcile the interests of the colonists with
the habits of savages, who bad no other notion of pro-
perty than that it was so much goods on which to seize.
After the second capture in 1805, that question became
still more urgent, and a further extension took place in
1810, but in 1819 there was a proposal made in the House
that 50,0001. should be voted for sending out emigrants
to the Cape, to be settled in the district called Graham's
Town, and in its vicinity, which was very much ap-
proved of by the House ; and it was thought desirable
that persons suffering from inadequacy of means at home
should be enabled to live in comfort in a colony so
healthy as the Cape of Good Hope. The House agreed
to that proposal, and the only speech recorded on the
occasion was that of the Hon. Member for Montrose,
who only complained that Government had not gone far
enough, and that a further grant ought to be proposed,
and a greater number of people sent out. There was
such a number of persons sent out that the district be-
came in process of time very flourishing, and the English
and Dutch colonists came into possession of considerable
property. In 1848 it was stated the export of wool
was about 2,250,0001 b., the value of which
was 143 0001. ; of agricultural produce, 182,0001.; of
live stock, upwards of 2,000,000; of fixed pro-
perty, 2,000,0001. ; making a value of upwards of
4,000,0001. in the eastern district. But the per-
sons who had been there settled by the direct interven-
tion of Government complained from time to time of
depredations made upon their cattle, that their lives and
properties were not safe, and that the tribes made con-
tinual incursions upon their estates. The British Go-
vernment and nation could not be indifferent to such
complaints. Having sanctioned emigration to the Cape,
after the colony had been formally ceded to us by the
Dutch, it was only natural that persons in command at
the Cape should seek a remedy for the evils complained
of. This question was not to be decided by casting blame
on the officer who happened to be in command at the
Cape. Sir H. Smith was a man distinguished for
his military services, and his acquirements were in-
ferior to those of few men. Why should the whole
blame be thrown upon him? It must be observed that
various governors who had preceded Sir H. Smith,
earnsdets,irSHirenßry ottinger,
Benjamin ,
all
jamin D'Urban,
en-
deavoured, according to their different views, founded on
namelyS
i rPeregrine
Lord
M Ca
t 1 aSnodni,
the information they possessed, to find a remedy for what
appeared to them to be a very serious mischief. It was
found that the Fish River was ill chosen as a boundary,
because the thickets on each side of the river enabled
unperceived by
the savages to come down to the borders,
the military posts, and select a favourable
for making an incursion into the British
1819 the boundary was extendedthe
Dfuuthteirsheae territory.
opportunityA c co r Id a.
a regular organization for defending ing to the ancient system of
the incursions made by the native tri tbcehs,
the
ft iscre
;Cape
ee
_hadpurpose
rcabpie
inmessnet
of stealing cattle, which was called the sy.s_tem_i?ef
rigour,
but This system was one of considerable g,
but was liable to abuse, and gave rise to acts of violence.
Our
When he (Lord J. for the
Russell) was Secretary
Colo-
nies a gei tleman from the Cape_ described the system to
him, and he could assure the House that it was not one
of which the people of this country would approve. If,
on the one hand, incursions of a barbarous character
were made isy the native tribes, who would ravage
and destroy all within their reach and drive away
the cattle which they captured, so, on the
other, the settlers not unfrequently avenged
their losses by sacrificing the lives of any
natives who might happen to fall into their power,
without observing those laws by which military men
were so careful to regulate their proceedings. It was,
he apprehended, on account of those abuses that the
commando system was dissolved in 1832 by Lord Stan-
ley, who thou held the seals for the colonies. But then