The Irish standard., 1902-11-15

a be the kind we taught the British in
South Africa-this kind''-Mr. Reitz
4 hung his hands above his head in the
conventional attitude of surrender, and
broke into a hearty laugh.
Mr.. Reitz contributes an interesting
article to the Gael for November ell
titled, "NIy Opinion of Mr.. Chamber
lain" The British Judas had said of
him: '"Some members or one member
at any rate, of the delegation that
signed the terms of peace, is reported
to have used language which is not
consistent with the declaration that he
then made, that he would accept King
Edward VII. as his true and lawful
ruler, 1 do not think there should be
any holding back of names, 1 refer to
Mr. Reitz''
Commenting on the foregoing quo
tation, Mr.. Reitz says:
"Now this statement, besides being
wholly superfuous and uncalled for,
had the additional Chamberlainan
quality of being grossly and unequivo-
cally false. I positively aver that on
the evening of May 81, when the terms
of surrender Ito which 1 had always
been opposed We're being signed
distinctly asked Lords Kitchener and
Miner, the signatories on behalf of
the British government, whether they
perfectly understood chat was sign
ing the document not in my personal
but only in my representative capa-
city," to which Lord Kitchener re-
piled, eyes, certainly" And subse
quently when on laying down my
arms 1 was asked by the English
officers who superintendent that "cere-
mony" whether would take the oath
of allegiance I distinctly refused to
do so giving as my reason that it was
not my intention ever to become Il
British subject.
"With these facts before him Mr..
Chamberlain yet had the impertinence
to claim that the late secretary of
state had not been acting ian honest
and straightforward part
"Lord Kitchener was present when
this allegation was made against
gentleman who for twenty-seven years
had been holding high offices in both
the republics, and yet this hero of
Khartoum had not the manliness to
contradict Mr. Chamberlain, of whom
he, like so many other great ones of
the British nation, seem-for what
reason heaven only knows-to be
afraid.
"This charge against Lord Kitchen
err does not seem too strong when we
bear in mind that in respect to another
important point he, when he should
have spoken the truth and shamed
the devil" maintained craven silence.
"Before the "Tcrms" were agreed
to by the Boer delegates, their gener-
ais Botha, De Wet and Delarey) as
sured them that Lords Kitchener and
MlllleF IttO SOlcllHly pAoliilSSu ShoI Ill
addition to the amnesty for Cape
rebels, formally laid before the dele
gates in writing, they would also ask
the king at his coronation to grant
general and complete amnesty to all
concerned in the war-and it was this
assurance that to 4 considerable OK
tent induced the acceptance by the
Beers of those sO-called Terms.
"Mr Joseph Chamberlain openly
and impudently repudiatcd this oblisa-
ton on the part of his government,
and Lord Kitchener maintained the
silence which gives CONSENT thus
breaking his word in a manner that
any man, and especially a great gen
eral, should be ashamed of.
'These are some of the things that
have taken place in England and in
South Africa According to all reports
the conduct and attitude of Lord Mil
ner has been even worse and more I'M
compromising than that of his lord
and master, who directs the policy OF
the colonial office from Downing
street"