I will send you the amount. further mindful of our greeting. Three maids and three youths. Be Yours. I could give more quotations, but I have probably brought forward enough. Can there be any doubt, not only that slavery existed in the Transvaal, but that it existed continuously up to the time of the annexation? I go further. I assert that it existed sub rosâ during the English occupation; that it revived during the war, and pending the negotiations; and it is a reasonable inference to suppose it will continue to exist. The recent "inboeking" of Mapoch's Kaffirs among the Boers shows that the British scotched the snake, but did not kill it; and the impotence of the British Resident to protect the natives has been shown in a hundred ways. In proof of my assertion that slavery existed sub rosâ during our occupation, and more openly afterwards, I refer to the Blue Books containing the narrative of the doings of the Royal Commission. More than one affidavit was filed before that august, but dummy body, testifying to recent attempts made by the Boers to compel the natives to work for them. The Rev. Mr. Thorne stated to the Commission, that as late as the 20th of April, 1881, his daughter saw a Kaffir girl at Lydenburg, crying bitterly. She asked the girl why she was crying, and the girl told her she had been beaten by a Boer, and showed the young lady the welts on her body. The Boer's son was standing by, and he said by way of explanation that his father had bought the girl of a Kaffir, that she had frequently run away, and that his father had beaten her for absconding. 8 What is the "inboeking" of Mapoch's tribe (1883) but slavery? But it may be said, granted there was slavery, not only in the early days of the Republic, but throughout its existence, it does not follow we were justified in annexing the country. We did not go to war with the United States because there was formerly slavery there, nor have we annexed Turkey because she connives at slavery. I might answer by referring to the Sand River Convention, but I hold that the very instinct of self-preservation justified our interference. The raids made by the Boers for the purpose of procuring slaves endangered the peace of our neighbouring territories. We gave the Boers liberty, but not licence, by the Sand River Convention; liberty to possess their own, but not licence to rob others. The annexation was less an annexation than a resumption of dormant rights, and the resumption was justified. both by reason of broken pledges and regard for our own paramount interests. But it may further be urged that the conditions which existed previous to the annexation still exist; and that notwithstanding we have given the country back to the Boers. I can only say, I am quite aware of the fact; and, with all respect to the framers of the Transvaal Convention, I think they will continue to exist, and will prove a source of danger. But that is the concern of those who gave the country back to the Boers. 79 CHAPTER V. THE REASONS WHICH PROMPTED THE ANNEXATION (continued). Causes of wars with the natives-The purchase of and raiding for slaves-Cattle-lifting-Earth-hunger-Mr. Osborn and Mr. Chapman on the raids on natives-Story of the raid on bushmen on the eastern border-Attack on Malouw-The Commission of Inquiry into the Raids in the North-The retaliatory measures of the natives, resulting in the abandonment of Schoemansdal―The doings of Abel Erasmus - Weakness of the Executive-Financial condition of the country-Mr. Sargeaunt's report-Summary and conclusion. THE apprentices, or slaves, of the Boers were obtained in two ways. Some were bought from the natives, and others were orphans "found" destitute after a raid. Both methods were provocative of fighting and disturbance. The raids produced retaliatory measures on the part of the natives, and the purchase of slaves from natives indirectly tended in the same direction. The native traders in human flesh trafficked in the children of other blacks, whom they plundered. The plundered blacks had a natural objection to parting with their children. Attack was followed by retaliation. This led to war, and in course of time the whites were sure to be involved. Another prolific source of wars with the natives was the raids made by the Boers for the purpose of obtaining cattle. Both the Betshuana and the Zulu races love their cattle almost more than themselves, certainly more than their wives. Among the natives cattle form the standard of reputation and respectability. A native with a large store of oxen is a great man. Without cattle he is nobody. Oxen are the current coin of the country-the standard of value by which everything else is appraised. A native does not part with his beloved cattle on a slight occasion, and it must be an important reason which will induce him even to kill one for food. The Boers of the Transvaal have an affection for cattle almost equal to that of the natives; and they found it less trouble to take the cattle of the "swart schepsels" (black rascals) than to buy or breed. But here, again, the natives objected. And so arose another cause of war. The "earth-hunger" of the Boers was another source of war. It might be thought that a country of the size of the Transvaal would have been enough for the 6000 or 8000 heads of families who inhabited it. But such was not the case. The boundaries of the Republic were constantly being enlarged, to suit the capacious appetite of the Boers for more land. Sometimes by fighting, sometimes by fraud, and occasionally by purchase, land was constantly being acquired. A vivid picture of the mode in which the encroachments were carried out is given by Mr. Osborn, the Resident Magistrate of Newcastle, in Natal, now the British Resident in Zululand, in a report presented to Sir H. E. Bulwer in 1876. Mr. Osborn says (C. 1748, p. 196) : -- The Boers-as they have done before in other cases and are still doing-encroached by degrees upon native territory, commencing by obtaining permission to graze stock upon portions of it at certain seasons of the year, followed by individual graziers obtaining from native headmen a sort of right or licence to squat upon certain defined portions, ostensibly in order to keep other Boer squatters away from the same land. These licences, temporarily extended as friendly or neighbourly acts by unauthorized headmen, after a few seasons of occupation by the Boer [are] construed by him as title, and his permanent occupation ensues. Damage for trespass is levied by him upon the very men from whom he obtained right to squat, to which the natives submit out of fear of the matter reaching the ears of the paramount chief, who would, in all probability, severely punish them for opening the door to encroachment by the Boer. After a while, however, the matter comes to a crisis, in consequence of the incessant disputes between the Boers and the natives: one or other of the disputants lays the case before the paramount chief, who, when hearing both parties, is literally frightened with violence and threats by the Boer into granting him the land. Upon this the usual plan followed by the Boer is at once to collect a few neighbouring Boers, including a field-cornet, or even an acting provisional field-cornet, appointed by the field-cornet or provisional cornet, the latter to represent the Government, although without instructions authorizing him to act in the matter. A few cattle are collected among themselves, which the party takes to the chief, and his signature is obtained to a written instrument alienating to the Republican Boers a large slice of or all his territory. The contents of this document are, so far as I can make out, never clearly or intelligibly explained to the chief who signs it, and [he] accepts of the cattle under the impression that it is all in settlement of hire for the grazing licences granted by his headmen. This, I have no hesitation in saying, is the usual method by which the Boers obtain what they call cessions to them of territories by native chiefs. In Sikukuni's case, they allege that his father, Sikwato, ceded to them the whole of his territory (hundreds of square miles) for 100 head of cattle! It will be remembered that about fifteen months ago the Transvaal Government sent their delegates with a commando of several hundred men to Swazi-land, ostensibly with no hostile intention. The real object of this large force being sent there I could not at the time clearly ascertain. It has since transpired, however, that the delegates entered into some treaty with the Swazi king, by which the latter ceded, it is said, the whole of Swazi-land to the Boer Republic, for what consideration I have been unable to learn. It is plain, however, that the commando was sent with the view of awing the chief, G |