Page:The Annual Register 1899.djvu/200

 192] ENGLISH HISTOEY. [sept.

Transvaal Goyernment " cannot understand on what grounds of justice it can be expected that it should be bound to grant the rest. ...

"However earnestly," continued Dr. Reitz, in what may be called the operative portion of this critical despatch, "this Government also desires to find an immediate and satisfac- tory course by which existing tension should be brought to an end, it feels itself quite unable as desired to recommend or propose to the South African Republic Volksraad and people the part of its proposal contained in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of its note, August 19, omitting the conditions on the acceptance of which alone the offer was based, but declares itself always still prepared to abide by its acceptance of the invitation [of] her Majesty's Government to get a joint commission composed as intimated in its note of September 2.

The despatch then repudiated with warmth the idea that the Transvaal Government had ever expressed any readiness to allow English members of the Volksraad to use their own language there. It avowed willingness to co-operate towards the composition of a Tribunal of Arbitration, deprecated the making of " new proposals more difficult for this Govern- ment," and hoped her Majesty's Government would be satisfied to revert to the proposal for a joint inquiry into the July Franchise Law.

The Transvaal's reply, though verbose, was plainly "nega- tive " in regard to the demands put forward by this country on the franchise question. The Government were now free to exercise the right they had expressly reserved "to consider the situa- tion de novo, and to formulate their own proposals for a final settlement." Such proposals, it was recognised, were unlikely to be regarded by the Boers as easier of acceptance than those which they had just refused. In these circumstances a rupture became increasingly probable, and there was a growing eager- ness in Great Britain that the strength of the empire should be exerted to secure the essentia] aims of British policy in South Africa. Yet there were many persons, though a relatively small minority, who, in varying degrees, were averse to the idea of war against the Transvaal under almost any circum- stances, or who thought that at any rate the British case was insufficient, and had been badly handled. The public ex- pression, however, of such sentiments was limited, the period for recess speeches not having commenced. Sir Wm. Harcourt was the first to open the platform campaign. Addressing his constituents at Tredegar (Sept. 20), he said that he had a special reason for not keeping silence, because he shared with Mr. Chamberlain, in Mr. Gladstone's Government of 1880, the responsibility of framing the constitution of the Transvaal. An historical disquisition, led him to the conclusion that Mr. Chamberlain's contention, resting suzerainty on the alleged persistence of the preamble of the 1881 Convention, was inadmis-