The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-11-18
England and the Beers.


corning the merits of the con-
troVersy between England and the
Beers The Standard will not under
take to say how the propositions stand
nor will it attempt to settle the question
by it's own dictum.
Regardless of the particular questions
involved, there Is quite general dispo-
sition to sympathize with the Beers
because of their undoubted bravery and
their comparative weakness. Upon the
other hand, there are some who are in
clined to favor England in a spirit of
reciprocity, as it were, it being assum-
ed that Great Britain was especially ia
vorable to us during the Spanish war.
Neither Of these considerations should
carry any especial weight. If the Beers
have done what is actually wrong,
their weakness should not be allowed
to protect them. On the other hand. IL
England's cause cannot be defended
upon other grounds than her friendship
for US in a case where we were clearly
right, that should not be allowed to in
tluence our Judgment with reference to
her present trouble with the Beers.
There are, however, very many, not
merely in America, but in England as
we'll, to whom the argument of the
British government is far from convinc-
ing. The claim Of suzerainty sn1acks
too much OF medieval times to be popu-
lar at the very close Of the nineteenth
century. Moreover, 1t is by no means
clear how the suzerainty was obtained,
or whether it Is claim that can be
fairly sustained. But if it can be up
held, 1t seems clear that it only relates
to the external affairs of the republic,
and does not include the right to die
tate the laws Of citizenship or any other
laws Of a strictly internal character.
The right to prescribe the terms upon
which citizenship may be acquired, is
one that is asserted by every nation in
the world and by none more stoutly
than by England herself. If the Beers
have laid down rather stringent rules,
it is no doubt owing to the fear that
they may be completely swamped and
their cherished institutions overthrown
togther alien and out Of sympathy with
them.
But the particular requirement COM
planned of that an Englishman shall
specifically renounce his allegiance to
the British government is precisely
what we require him to do in this coun-
try, just as the German is made to ex-
pressly forswear the emperor of Ger
many, or the Frenchmam the govern
ment Of France, and so on with each
distinctive nationality. This provision
is eminently right and wise, the purpose
being to impress the new citizen with
the thought that the government of his
native country no longer has any claim
upon him
Lately We have been told that the
Beers are not entitled to our sympathy
because the Transvaal, while a repub-
lie in name, Is an oligarchy in fact,
This, however, is debatable, and if 1t is
true, 1t scarcely touches the question at
issue. England is not republic either,
and it is evident that the Beers are well
satisfied with their government, what
ever it may be. Certain it is that the
badness of the Boer government is not
what has reused England to action, for
| 1t will scarcely be claimed that it is
worse than some others with which
England is maintaining very pleasant
relations. 1t requires distorted mag
nation, indeed, to picture the govern
ment of the Beers as worse than that
of Turkey, for example, which would 70
| to pieces in short order were it not for
| the sustaining power of England. No
one will question the stubborn, bulldog
| courage Of the Briton; but at the same
| time it is entirely safe to say that If
the Transvaal contained twenty mil
| lion Beers, England would not be as
sorting suzerainty over them, and that
If the country contained no gold, even
with their present numbers, the Beers
would have been permitted to live on
| in their own primitive way without
| disturbance for an indefinite period of
! time.
| The English colony at Pretoria seems