The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-09-09

pedient to seize full control
of the Witwatersrand mines in the
Transvaal, mines which in 1896 paid
81, 45O. 900 in dividends, $13,5OO,OOO in 1897
and $2j, ,45O,O 900 in 1898, and which are
roughly estimated to be worth half a
billion dollars. Reduced to plain terms
President Kruger virtually charges
that the empire of Great Britain is de-
libcrately trying to steal the Transvaal
on account of it's mineral wealth, and
that the points raised by England with
regard to the Outlanders are mere
qubbles designed to lead up to an act
of wholesale robbery under the compul-
sion of superior force.
On it's legal side the question is
whether the Beers have ever surren.
dered the right to control their domes-
tic affairs. England claims suzerainty
under the terms of the treaty of 1881;
this claim President Kruger fatty
denies. But even if the British inter-
pretation of that treaty be accepted,
how. ask the Beers, can it be used to
justify regulation of the internal af-
fairs of the state under protection?
There is nothing in International law,
i'm custom, or in precedent" affirms the
Washington Post, a journal in sympa-
thy with the Beers, ito justify the
claim that an independent state must
enfranchse aliens at the diCtation Of
the pretending suzerain." I'VE are
determined" President Kruger writes,
"tO defend to the uttermOst that free
dom and self-government for which
our people have shed blood in every
part of South Africa"
In elucidation of the situation it is
necessary to review briefly the official
correspondence which has passed be-
tween Kruger and Chamberlain, the
British colonial secretary. We avail
| ourselves of an excellent summary
printed in the Philadelphia Record:
About the time of the fiasco Of the
| BloemfOntein conference (at which
| representatives of the two govern
ments vainly sought to reach basis
! of settlemenU a law was passed by the
/ volksraad or Boer congress to extend
]
seven years residence in the TransVaal.
| This fact was communicated to Mr..
! Chamberlain by the British diplomatic
| agent at Pretoria, whereupon a note
was sent by the colonial secretary pro-
! posing the creation of a joint commits
| sion to inquire into the effect Of the
new law upon the status of the for
| eigners in the South African republic.
Instead of a direct reply to these sug-
! gestions of Mr.. Chamberlain the
| Transvaal government submitted
! counter proposals substantially as fol-
lows: % Five years residence to quail
| ify Outlanders for the franchise; (2)
the new electors to have a share-not
! defined-in the choice of the president;
| 90 increased representation of the gold
fields district in the volksraad-to the
extent probably, of eight new seats, or
One-fifth Of the whole body; (D other
questions to be submitted to arbitra-
tion, but not by a foreign power; (5)
! Great Britains intervention not to be
considered as establishing precedent;
C6) the British government not to insist
upon a further assertion of the exist
cnce of suzerainty over the Transvaal
The concessions numbered /, and
were conditional upon the acceptance
of the terms proposed under the heads
A. and c.
In his answer Mr.. Chamberlain "as-
! sumes" that the franchise to be grant
ed will not be hampered by conditions
impairing its utility, and will secure
immediate representatiOn"-the BOel
proposal leaving it doubtful whether
the qualifying law should be retroac'
tive or whether Outlanders who should
have resided in the Transvaal since
1884 would be obliged to wait another
five years for the privilege of voting
The British proposal for a joint com
mission of inquiry was therefore re-
newed, With respect to intervention
and suzeTainty, the Imperial note says
that "the government cannot debar il
self Of the rights under the conVen
tions, nor divest itself of the obliga
tions of a civilized power to protect it,
subjects abroad from injustice" Tn,
note concludes with a reminder tha
differences exist other than those re
lating to the franchise, and whicl
ought to be settled coincidently will
the latter, To that end it was suggest
ed that these matters and the question
of arbitration be submitted to a con
ference TO be held at Cape Town.
| Bearing i'm mind the prpcpding ia ct s
the true intent of President Kruger
latest dispatch becomes clear. Afte
expressing regrets that the British pro
posals were not acceptable. and admit
ting Great Britains right under tn
conventions and in accordance wit
international law to protect her sub
iects, the Transvaal government denie
the British claim of suzeranty, bu
agrees to the proposed conference a
Cape Town. In other words, Presiden
Kruger declines to permit an inquir
by commissioners into the effect of
franchise law TO be enacted by tn
TTansvaal raad because such an in
quiry would constitute an admission q
the supervisory power of Great Britai
} over the legislation of the Boer re
public, and hence, by implication, a