Part 5

The next requisite of State action is the promotion, by legislation and administration, of the development of the present and future goldfields, and other mineral fields, in such manner as may tend to further the general ends of the Imperial policy as already described. The taxation of the mines should be so adjusted as to favour British immigration and the creation of a prosperous and loyal British community. The development of new fields should be encouraged; adequate sums should be raised for public objects; the minerals, expressly declared to be property of the State, should be primarily regarded as a fund for State purposes, not one for the creation of millionaires or the undue enriching of shareholders in Hamburg or Paris or Vienna. The welfare of the mass of British residents in the towns engaged in trade should be considered in legislation affecting the gold mines.

In view of the presence of an overwhelming majority of the subject Kaffir race, all Europeans should be trained to arms, on the model of the laws already in existence in the two new Colonies. From an Imperial, as distinguished from a European standpoint, this measure is equally necessary. The Boers are born soldiers: a nation in arms. No reliance on a professional army or professional police can afford any assurance of stability for the Imperial rule. The Boers would regard such a régime as merely one of transitory military domination.

An efficient system of education, from primary school to university, should be organised and carried out. In the new Colonies great progress has already been made in this direction, and a recently published address by Mr. W. Sargent, the Director of Education, shows that the principles to be kept in mind are clearly apprehended.

A sane and consistent policy with regard to the status of the Kaffir and other non-European people should be adopted and adhered to. The Boer position, that the Kaffir is not in justice entitled to equality, social or political, with Europeans, should be upheld, as that plainly sanctioned by European experience of two centuries and a half.

Efficiency should be insisted on as the test for appointment in the public service. Salaries on an adequate scale should be given, bearing in mind the standard of payment usually obtaining in gold-bearing districts. The obstacles in the way of making efficiency the test of appointment should be clearly understood, and as far as possible guarded against; the persistence of Young Afrikander Separatist ideals, and the readiness of the propagandists to accept office under the Imperial Government; the danger of undue weight being given to the influence of the great capitalists; the equal danger of the intrigue, favouritism, and nepotism of London society--of which so much was heard at the late Committee of Inquiry into the training of army officers--being brought to bear on appointments to office in the new Colonies.

The language question--that of the degree of recognition necessary or expedient of the Dutch language in the courts and public offices--is so important that it is better to consider it separately.

VI.--THE LANGUAGE QUESTION

The question of the degree of recognition of the Dutch language in the new Colonies to be accorded by the new administration is one of the most difficult, and at the same time one of the most urgent and altogether inevitable, presented by the altered situation, the result of the late war. It is one of the cases where not to decide is to decide. Let us endeavour to understand the conditions of the problem, bearing steadily in mind the objects to be aimed at by the Imperial policy.

No responsible statesman in the United Kingdom or in the Colonies can desire to take any step other than conciliatory to Boer sentiment, provided the main object of creating a united and prosperous European community is obtained. Anything like a persecution of the Boer tongue or traditions would not only be unjust, but most unwise. At the same time, Imperial statesmen must remember that British-descended citizens of the Empire in South Africa hold that their sentiment and their opinion is not to be taken as a matter to be ignored. Now, Imperialist sentiment in South Africa is united as to the desirability of having only one official language, and of doing away with the dual language system introduced in Cape Colony twenty years ago.

Limiting any action of the Imperial Government, must necessarily be the conditions as to the recognition of Dutch agreed upon with the Boer generals as one of the terms of peace. These conditions were that the Dutch language is to be taught in the schools, in cases where the parents of the children desire it; and in the courts of law in cases where, in the opinion of the court, the ends of justice will be furthered by its use. The wish of the parents and the discretion of the law-courts are, therefore, to be arbiters. The peace terms, in this matter, seem wholly reasonable; but the main question of a dual language remains unaffected.

Let us first deal with the cause of much misapprehension in the United Kingdom in this matter. Here I will quote from an article of mine published some time before the peace agreement:--

"There is no question here of the suppression of the language of a people. The language of the Boer people of South Africa is a patois called the Taal, based on the seventeenth-century Hollander Dutch, with a mixture of many strange words, Kaffir and English, and with the omission of most grammatical inflexions. In that happy tongue you are permitted to say: 'I is.' It is needless to say there is no literature in this patois, as there is in the Hollander Dutch of this century. Now, it is only to Hollander Dutch that it is proposed to accord equal audience as an official language. The official recognition of Hollander Dutch dates from 1882 in the Cape Colony, and is a result of the political propaganda of the Afrikander Bond. It was openly announced and hailed as the 'thin end of the wedge' to prevent the fusion of the Boer and British strains of the European people, and to drive the British into the sea. It is almost as grotesque a misrepresentation to call this claim for the official recognition of Hollander Dutch a popular demand, as if, in regard to modern Italy, we were told that the peasants of Umbria or the Marches were hungering and thirsting for the recognition of Augustan Latin as entitled to equal audience with Italian in the courts and public offices of Italy.

"The veld Boer does not understand Hollander Dutch. He only hears the Hollander tongue, or, rather, the seventeenth-century predecessor of it, in the text from the seventeenth-century Dutch Bible read out in the churches on Sundays by the predikant, or in the hymns, once chanted by his forefathers of the Lowlands, who worsted Alva, persecutor of the Saints of the Lord.

"It will clear the air greatly if people at home will realise what is the force behind this Hollander Dutch language movement. It is the Young Afrikander party.

"For sixty years English was the sole official language in South Africa. The experiment of two official languages is one of only twenty years' duration, and has not been crowned with any conspicuous success, unless racial cleavage, political and social, be counted as such.

"No other course can so speedily promote the fusion of all Europeans. Judging by the trend of events, the future among the European people belongs to one or two of the great languages. It is significant that, at the present moment of time, with a knowledge of English and French, one can travel the world. The fusion of European strains, so happily accomplished in the United States of America, is admittedly due to the determined enforcement of a single language as the sole official language of the Republic. Immigrants of all European nationalities learn to speak and write English--their children of the next generation become Americans. As a London Consul-General of the United States pointed out to me, the reunion of the European race, as a political measure on a vast scale, has been first accomplished in the American Commonwealth. Never since the pre-historic time of the root-origins of our language, never since the corporate unity of the Roman Empire, has there been so vast a breaking down of barriers between Europeans.

"The matter is one of political expediency, not of æsthetics. The unity of the European people is a greater historic fact and present reality than any of those brief heritages of common life for a few short centuries of one or other sections of the race, giving rise to the national tongues. Personally, one may sympathise with the scholar's preference for a survival of Latin as the language of Europe, as it was during the Roman Empire, as it was during the Middle Ages, and as it would have remained but for the outburst of Nationalist particularism during the sixteenth century. One may lament, with a loyal European like Talleyrand, what that outburst has cost Europe; led by the ambition of the House of Capet in France, of the Tudor in England, and the princes of North Germany, plunderers of the Teutonic knights. No doubt it is true that thousands of millions of pounds and millions of lives have been wasted by that particularism--strange step-child of the unifying Renaissance. From the æsthetic side, it is vain to argue whether Keltic be a purer tongue, more passionately expressive, Spanish more majestic, or Italian liquid music. The sieve of the gods seems hitherto to let through, for the world of the European race, only two of the great tongues--French and English."

In a word, for all æsthetic purposes, let the various harmonies of all the tongues of the European race continue to enrich the choir, enshrining memories of the past. But for the political field of action the trumpet of command and order should sound a note clear from its being single.

Any incidental inconvenience, such as must arise to the first generation of immigrants to the American Commonwealth, must only be treated as transitory, and, as far as possible, provided against. Very few Europeans who do not know English have business in the law-courts or public offices. In the years preceding the late war, only five out of every hundred cases in the Transvaal law-courts were between people not conversant with English. For this small minority, in all the public offices and the courts, competent interpreters can be provided.

VII.--LEGISLATIVE MEASURES

It may be well that I should add some suggestions as to the measures which I at present hold should be taken to put into force the general lines of legislation, already sketched out as suitable for the carrying out of the Imperial policy as already defined. But it should be understood that these suggestions are only intended as furnishing material for discussion. In the absence of fuller information as to future needs and emergencies, it would be unwise to finally advocate concrete measures. What is, in my mind, of importance is not any specific measure, but the principles of Imperial policy on which I have insisted. If it can be shown to me, in the future discussions on these matters, in which I hope to take part on my return to South Africa, that other measures are better suited to carry out the consistent policy I have defined, I shall be prepared to advocate such other measures.

In the first place, I think that in view of the wide divergence of opinion and interest, among the British residents quite as much as among the Boers, a consultative body, nominated by the High Commissioner, should be appointed to advise on any projected legislation. For some time, while the form of Crown Colony Government is continued, advice from such a body will be specially needful. Apart from the maintenance of law and order, the interests of the great mining groups, representation of shareholders resident in Europe is by no means necessarily the same as those of the rest of the British residents, or indeed those of the Imperial Government. Among such matters of divergence of interest may be enumerated the scale and method of taxation on the mines, no matter for what Imperial purpose--British immigration, State irrigation works, or university and general education. The maintenance of the present very high rate of wages of the European miners is another subject. British residents in the towns, shopkeepers, importers, professional men and their employees, are concerned in the maintenance of a high rate of wages for the miners, as the money is spent in the country, not in Paris or Berlin. Again, the introduction of the truck system, the supply of goods by the miners to their employees, European or Kaffir, while it would increase the profits of mining shareholders in Europe, would destroy the means of existence of the bulk of the British residents in the towns.

Amongst the Boers, there is almost as great divergence of interest between the wealthy farmers, desirous of keeping together their vast cattle ranches of 6000 acres, and the class of Bijwoners (tenants at will on an over-lord's land), whose interest would be favoured by the dividing up of cattle ranches, and the encouragement of small farmers who would be agriculturists.

For this reason, a consultation body should be thoroughly representative of all classes.

Direct legislation favouring British immigration of agriculturists is plainly necessary, and as well the creation of State irrigation works. Such steps, it is reassuring to know, have already been taken. Personally, I am in favour of village ownership of agricultural lands being instituted, a system with which the Boers are already familiar, in connection with the cultivation of the lands owned by the towns.

To promote the prosperity of British residents in the towns, and as well to secure a market for agricultural produce, the truck system should be prohibited by law; and the compound system, under which the Kaffir workmen in mines are not only supplied with goods but confined to barracks called "compounds," should also be prohibited. Neither system has hitherto been in force in the new Colonies.

As regards the Gold Law, the new British administration has established a tax of ten per cent. on the net profits of each mine, and has retained the previous system as well, of taxing the possession of mining areas. It will require some time to see how the present method of levy affects the growth of the British population. Personally, I have not been convinced by the arguments in favour of the "claim license" system: it is held by its opponents that it tends to throw all the mining areas into the possession of the great mining groups, the areas being forfeited to the State in times of depression by poorer men who are unable to continue to pay. Suggestions deserving consideration have been made as to the advisability of the State developing gold areas already in the possession of the State.

As regards the arrears of claim licenses accruing during the war against the expelled British inhabitants, I have strongly advocated in the London press their entire remission. The Boer burgher on commando is held to be exempted; it is difficult to see why the expelled British should not also be exempted.

Another measure which I have supported is that of the arming of all British civilians, for reasons already enumerated. An essential to the measure being successful, being loyally supported, is that, on the Boer model, the officers of the corps should be elected by their men. British colonists, with their traditions of liberty and independence, will never submit to being compulsorily placed on military service and subjected to the orders of officers whom they have not chosen.

No measure of greater political moment can be taken than the thorough organising of a system of education, from the university to the school. I am one of those who support the making of the Gold Reef city a great university centre.

As regards the Native Law, I advocate as little as possible alteration in the laws already in force. The Boer theory of the position of the Kaffir--as not an equal, but entitled to justice, under tutelage to a government directed by European ideals--is the sound one.[2]

Asiatic immigration in any form, whether of British Indians from India, or Chinese from Hong-Kong or elsewhere, would be a measure fraught with disaster to the future of European civilisation. With the exception of some employers of labour in Rhodesia and Natal, South African opinion--British, Boer, even Kaffir--is opposed to Asiatic immigration. Even the employers referred to only desire to encourage the importation of Asiatics as manual labourers, not as owners of the land or traders in the towns.

FOOTNOTES:

[2] In the _Fortnightly Review_, August 1902. Ideal with this subject: "Negrophilism in South Africa."

THE AFRICANDER PARTY

ITS ORIGIN, ITS GROWTH, ITS AIMS

BY THE HON. A. WILMOT

_Member of the Legislative Council, Cape Colony; Author of "History of Our Own Times in South Africa," &c., &c._

One of the greatest statesmen whose experience and ability have assisted the Imperial Government declares that it was only after two years' residence that he understood the political problems affecting South Africa. Hundreds rush in where Milners fear to tread, and the little knowledge which induces superficial views and rash judgment on a merely _primâ facie_ case are now at present, as they have been in the past, among the causes which impede the progress of a vast country which we hope will yet become a great federated dominion under the British crown.

It is because of the vital importance of going to the root of the political questions affecting South Africa that this paper is written.

The origin of the Africander party is traceable principally to discontent with British rule. The Cape Colony, as our readers know, was obtained by conquest in 1806, and by purchase from the Netherlands for six million pounds sterling in the year 1814. Mr. Paul M. Botha, Member of the Orange Free State Volksraad for Kroonstadt, states the case from the Dutchman's point of view, and tells us that as England said that South Africa was her country she ought to have governed it, instead of which she shirked responsibilities and was guilty of the most glaring inconsistencies. One day England blew hot and the next cold. "One moment she insisted on swallowing us, and the next moment she insisted on disgorging us." For example, the Orange Free State was declared British territory because a governor said, "You can never escape British jurisdiction." Then we were abandoned because the next governor said, "The country was a howling wilderness." The Transvaal was annexed, and Sir Garnet Wolseley declared: "The rivers will sooner run back in their courses than that England will give back the Transvaal." Shortly after that the Transvaal was retroceded, after Majuba, because the British Ministry said, "We have been unjust in annexing this country."[3]

The slavery question, Mr. Botha tells us, was handled with astounding negligence and ignorance of the circumstances of the people. Although England was perfectly right in emancipating the slaves, yet the way it was done irritated, annoyed, and disgusted the people, and sowed seeds of distrust which have never been eradicated. England failed to carry out effectively her promises of compensation.

On the minor grievances, such as Slagter's Nek and other so-called injustices of England, Mr. Botha lays no stress. "It was a rough period, and rough measures were used by all Governments." He significantly adds that what he has heard of the cruelty of the Dutch East India Company's officials makes him think that anyhow British rule was heaven to that of the Dutch. Whatever a well-educated man like Mr. Botha may say, we know that the rank and file of the Dutch throughout South Africa are taught to "Remember Slagter's Nek." Nothing can be more unjust than to blame the British power for executing rebels, caught red-handed and sentenced to death in perfect accord with both evidence and law by a competent Court, whose members were themselves of Dutch extraction. Nevertheless this is one of the heavy popular grievances.

Mr. Botha says that England's weak and spasmodic policy in South Africa has made the Boer what he is to-day--distrustful and contemptuous of British statesmen. By further receding into the interior, and having to fight wild beasts and hordes of Kaffirs, the Boer became blown out with vanity at his own prowess, and more and more ignorant. Through this ignorance it is easier to mislead than to lead him. A man who plays upon his vanity and prejudices against England quickly obtains influence. A loud talker and blusterer gets a better hearing than a quiet reasoner. "I ascribe this to want of education and complete isolation on the veldt."

As a marked illustration in support of Mr. Botha's view which has come under the present writer's observation, let us tell what occurred shortly before the war to a nephew of the Speaker of the House of Assembly who had to travel through the Transvaal to look after some landed property. This gentleman, who spoke the Taal perfectly, met at one place about two dozen Dutchmen who were, like the Laird of Cockpen, "greatly ta'en up with the 'fairs of the State." The first question, "Can we beat the British?" was answered by a unanimous "Yes, we have done so before, and can, of course, easily do so again." Second. "Tell me, Carls, could we beat England and France united?" "Certainly," said every one, "there can be no doubt about it." But now interposed a new speaker. "How if we had to fight England, France, and Germany?" The reply was unanimous. "We can beat them all three." No wonder that the people of the Lord, as they believed themselves to be, took the bit between their teeth at the time of the ultimatum. Not even Paul Kruger could then have stopped the war, for they felt perfectly assured of victory.

With a religion which has not unfitly been described as a superstition based upon the Old Testament, there is profound ignorance accompanied by prejudice of the most deep-rooted character. Mr. Botha tells us that unfortunately the ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church, "greedy for the fat lamb, the fowl, and the purse," foster this ignorance. One Predikant had actually the audacity to tell his congregation that God _must_ help His chosen people, otherwise He would lose His influence.

Mr. Botha defends his own people against charges of treachery, and gives it as his fixed opinion that a just and firm Government with uniformity of treatment will not only control and satisfy the Boers, but eradicate in time that feeling of distrust and fear which was engendered in their minds by the halting and unequal policy of England. He admits at the same time that it is to Britain that they owe peace, and that it was Britain that protected them from foreign invasion and saved them from continual civil strife. Then comes most important evidence. President Brand of the Free State recognised in the misgoverned Transvaal a subtle enemy. Indeed, it is scarcely remembered that in 1857 the burghers of the South African Republic invaded the Orange Free State territory and declared that it belonged to them. Paul Kruger was subsequently raised up, in the opinion of his followers, to be a Moses, whose mission was to deliver "De Africander Natie" from British bondage. Mr. Botha asks us to let him tear this veil of false romance away. "We know him," he tells us, "as an avaricious, unscrupulous, and hypocritical man, who sacrificed a whole people to his cupidity." Krugerism spread over South Africa, using the Bond, the press, and the pulpit to further its schemes.