New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-09-17

The Transvaal situation menaces the peace OF
Africa. That seems to be the state of the case
to-day. The Tribune's London correspondent
q few days ago said that the only danger lay In
an impetuous Boer rush or a change Of temper
at Pretoria. The rush has not yet been made,
but unhapply the change of temper appears
10 have occurred. 1t is intimated that the Boer
reply to the latest British proposition IS not
favorable The British terms are not accepted,
hut in their place some counter terms are pro-
posed. which will probably not be acceptable 70
Great Britain. and which are calculated
TO delay settlement and TO prolong the pres
cnt costly and perilous state Of tension and
uncertainty. Such tcmporizing would in any
case be rcgretable seeing how much material
suffering and loss and how much friction and
danger Of conflict it is bound to cause. On the
present grounds It is doubly dcplorable; It is
Illogical and indcfcnsbe. and will assuredly
Icact To the grave discredit Of those responsible
for f.
The British proposition. as We have already
shown was identical with that of the Beers
thems, ives. made month or less ago. except
ing in three particulars, TO wit: First, the
British demanded that English speaking mem
bers Of the TranSvaal Legislature be permitted
TO Use their native tongue ia speaking in that
body. That is a matter on which the BOer pro-
poSal Of last month was silent Second the
British refused 10 rcnOunce suzerainty The
Beers had demanded that they should do SO.
tut have since, we are Informed. withdrawn
that demand and agreed 10 a shelving of the
question. Third the British proposed n con
ference between the two Governments for
he consideration Of all further matters Of dis
pute. The Beers had asked that such matters
be submitted M once 10 the arbitration Of an
outside Power but the British proposal Of a
conference did not by any means bar such sub
mission. On all other points but these three
the British proposal Of last week was simply a
repetition Of the Beers own proposal OF last
month
Now, the regrctiable feature OF the Boer reply
5 this. that ii disagrees with the British, no
~ rejecting any Of these three new demands
II the British. hut by fatty rcpudlatine HI
fundamental part Of the Beers own offer name
y. the five years franchise. II the Pretori;
Government had replied that it must inss
upon pronunciation of the suzeranty, or cou
not allow English 10 be spoken In the Lcgislat
ure or would not enter a conference. II woul
have acted cons silently at least. But that az
cordng 10 report. is not what it did. Tactl
~ and practically It conceded those points In III
British proposal But ii said instead that
would not agree 10 the five years franchis
which II had itself explicitly offered n mont
before. In that it repudated it's own word
and placed itself in position which its be-
friends must regard a. unfortunate. II II wa
willing on August 81 TO grant n five years fral
chise. Il ought not to be unwilling on Septemb'
Il. In taking this ground It has cast a regre
table doubt upon It's own good faith. II has be-
the Boer complaint that the British are col
. stantly Increasing their demands. So as 70 Ike,
inst ahead OF Boer concessions. There * dang
now Of the rotor that the Beers show Z tc
dency 10 keep withdrawing their offers 80 as
keep inst behind the British demands
II is worthy Of notice that the stronge
friends Of The Pretoria Government outside
90