Page:EB1911 - Volume 26.djvu/204

Rh assumed by the Transvaal government now intervened and by annexing in 1895 Amatongaland, the region in question, blocked the Boers’ further progress towards the sea (see : History).

Swaziland suffered during the struggle between the Transvaal and Great Britain as to its destiny. Umbandine died in 1889 and had various successors. Ubanu, installed by the Boers as paramount chief in 1894, was a sanguinary despot and was compelled to flee in 1898. The principal personage in the country after Umbandine’s death was, however, his widow Naba Tsibeni, known to Europeans as the queen regent. She more than once appealed to the British to cause the Boers to respect the terms of the conventions, and before the outbreak of the Anglo-Boer war in 1899 she took the side of the British. On the annexation of the Transvaal in 1901 the queen regent asked that Swaziland might be annexed also. On the cessation of hostilities a British special commissioner was sent into the country—then in a condition bordering on anarchy—and a provisional administration established. In June 1903 an order in council formally conferred the government of the country on the governor of the Transvaal (then Lord Milner). Lord Milner visited Swaziland in July 1904 and denounced “the abominable network of concessions” in which the country was entangled. On the 3rd of October following the governor issued a proclamation providing further for the administration, and for the expropriation of the concessions other than those relating to land and minerals. In September 1906 Lord Selborne, who had succeeded Lord Milner, conferred with the queen regent and her councillors on questions specially affecting the natives. A lad named Sobhuza, born about 1898, was selected as paramount chief, Naba Tsibeni, his grandmother, being confirmed as regent during his minority. In December 1906 the control of Swaziland was severed from the governorship of the Transvaal and transferred to the High Commissioner for South Africa, and in March 1907 a resident commissioner was appointed. When the Union of South Africa was established in 1910, Swaziland, with other native territories, remained under direct Imperial control.

(A. P. H.; F. R. C.)  SWEARING (O. Eng. swerian, to swear, originally to speak aloud, cf. andswerian, to answer, Ger. schwören, Dan. svaerge, &c., all from root swer-, to make a sound, cf. “swarm,” properly the buzzing of bees, Lat. susurrus), the affirmation or uttering of a solemn declaration with an appeal to the Deity, some holy personage or sacred object as confirmation, hence the act of declaring the truth of a statement upon oath (see and ). The common use of the word is for the uttering of profane oaths or curses. In English law, while (q.v.) was at common law an indictable offence, cursing or swearing was left to the ecclesiastical courts. The Profane Oaths Act 1745 inflicted a sliding scale of fines for the use of profane oaths according to the rank of the offender, 1s. for a common labourer, soldier or seaman, 2s. for everyone below the rank of gentleman and 5s. for those of or above that rank; procedure under this act is regulated by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. By s. 8 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 the use of profane or obscene language is an offence punishable on summary conviction by a fine not exceeding 40s. or imprisonment not exceeding 14 days. The offence must be committed in a street and the act is confined to urban sanitary districts or to such rural districts to which s. 276 of the Public Health Act 1875 has extended it. By s. 12 of the Metropolitan Police Court Acts 1839 a similar offence is punishable in the metropolitan police area, and various districts have put in force by-laws for punishing swearing, cursing, or causing annoyance in public places. The restriction as to the place where the offence must be committed to be liable to punishment has led to the enforcement on occasions of the Profane Oaths Act, which applies to the whole of England and Wales and is not limited to cursing in the streets. It should not, however, apply to obscene language.  SWEATING-SICKNESS. A remarkable form of disease, not known in England before, attracted attention at the very beginning of the reign of Henry VII. It was known indeed a few days after the landing of Henry at Milford Haven on the 7th of August 1485, as there is clear evidence of its being spoken of before the battle of Bosworth on the 22nd of August. Soon after the arrival of Henry in London on the 28th of August it broke out in the capital, and caused great mortality. This alarming malady soon became known as the sweating-sickness. It was regarded as being quite distinct from the plague, the pestilential fever or other epidemics previously known, not only by the special symptom which gave it its name, but also by its extremely rapid and fatal course.

From 1485 nothing more was heard of it till 1507, when the second outbreak occurred, which was much less fatal than the first. In 1517 was a third and much more severe epidemic. In Oxford and Cambridge it was very fatal, as well as in other towns, where in some cases half the population are said to have perished. There is evidence of the disease having spread to Calais and Antwerp, but with these exceptions it was confined to England.

In 1528 the disease recurred for the fourth time, and with great severity. It first showed itself in London at the end of May, and speedily spread over the whole of England, though not into Scotland or Ireland. In London the mortality was very great; the court was broken up, and Henry VIII. left London, frequently changing his residence. The most remarkable fact about this epidemic is that it spread over the Continent, suddenly appearing at Hamburg, and spreading so rapidly that in a few weeks more than a thousand persons died. Thus was the terrible sweating-sickness started on a destructive course, during which it caused fearful mortality throughout eastern Europe. France, Italy and the southern countries were spared. It spread much in the same way as cholera, passing, in one direction, from north to south, arriving at Switzerland in December, in another northwards to Denmark, Sweden and Norway, also eastwards to Lithuania, Poland and Russia, and westwards to Flanders and Holland, unless indeed the epidemic, which declared itself simultaneously at Antwerp and Amsterdam on the morning of the 27th of September, came from England direct. In each place which it affected it prevailed for a short time only—generally not more than a fortnight. By the end of the year it had entirely disappeared, except in eastern Switzerland, where it lingered into the next year and the terrible “English sweat” has never appeared again, at least in the same form, on the Continent.

England was, however, destined to suffer from one more outbreak of the disease, which occurred in 1551, and with regard to this we have the great advantage of an account by an eyewitness, John Kaye or Caius, the eminent physician.

