The record-union., 1899-12-22

seized children and adults alike and
sold them.
DR.. Nachtigal- of the Berlin Mission
airy Society, wrote to President Burg
ers of the Transvaal in 1875: IF l
am asked to say conscientiously
whether such slavery has existed since
1852, and been recognized by the Gov
,ernment, I must answer in the affirm
ative.'
. What has concerned England most
has been the danger of the Boer wars
spreading to English territory and
to inquire into actual conditions and
authorized him to annex the Trans
vaal if necessary in the interests of
peace and safety. if a sufficient num-
Der of the people and the Legislature
were willing. He entered with a force
of but twenty-five mounted police.
marched through the land and issued
his proclamation annexing the country.
To say, therefore, that the annexation
was forcible, is. declares Mr.. Ireland.
absurd"
Shepstone received numerous adj
dresses and petitions from the Dutch,
and did not proclaim annexation until
he was satisfied that the necessary ana
prayed for reforms would not or could
not be carried out by the Dutch them
selves without British aid. After spend
ing three months in the country, he re-
ported that it was patent to every OBJ
server that the Government was power
less to control either it's white citizens
or it's native subjects; incapable of en-
forcing its laws Or of collecting its taxes;
salaries of officials We're four months in
arrears; the whites were divided into
factions; the native population ignored
the laws and authority, and that the
Zulu King, Cetewayo, was anxious to
conquer a country whose warriors had
convinced him that it could be easily
conquered by his clamoring regiments"
Yet Shepstone dislked to proclaim an
nexation if order could be preserved
otherwise. The President himself sub
mitted to him a new Constitution that
was so satisfactory that he agreed to
abandon the design of annexation, if
the Volksraad would adopt it. and
the country was willing to submit to it.
But the Volksraad refused, and there
fore President Burgers himself pro-
claimed it, which act the Executive
Council at once condemned. Thereupon
the President advised the Volksraad to
jected, and Shepstones proclamation
followed.
Ireland asserts that the appeal for
British action did not come from the
enemies of the Beers, but grew out Of
the anxiety of many Of the Beers to
be taken under British rule. This is,
of course. an English view Of the old
trouble, but there is sufficient in it to
warrant denial of the assertion of the
Beers of to-day, that their country has
been blameless amiable and peaceable.
After Shepstone's action an anti-Brit-
ish agitation in behalf of Kruger's can
didacy for the Presidency began, but
nothing would have come of it, says
the essayist, but for the incredible folly
of the British Government in not keep
ing faith and firmly adhering to the
promises made in the Shepstone procla-
nation.
One mistake consisted in delay in es-
tablishing an electoral government;
another was the recall of Shepstone
and the appointment of Lanyon, who.
while a good soldier, was unfit for adj
ministrative work, and whose vigorous
methods enkfndled the hatred of the
Beers Then followed the agitation
leading to the revolt of 1880, and with
the history of blunders since that date
the public is familiar.
From all which it is deducible that
in this whole South African Boer bust
ness there has been laundering, fault
on both sides and incapacity. But above
all, the claim of the Beers of innocence
in the premises is not sound.