ontend, the
administration of the South African Republic is on a sound basis, and
can, indeed, be favourably compared with that of other countries in a
similar position.

It knows full well that the grievances which are used, by means of blue
books, to stir up and excite the altruistic and humane feelings of the
British public are for the most part imaginary, and that even if they
were perfectly genuine, they nevertheless afford no ground for a
justifiable interference in the internal affairs of the Republic. It is
therefore necessary to have recourse to "Constitutional means" of
another description.

[Sidenote: Equal political rights.]

The third and last "Constitutional" method which Mr. Chamberlain has had
recourse to in order to forcibly intermeddle in the internal affairs of
the South African Republic is the claim of equal rights for all the
white inhabitants of the South African Republic. In this claim he has
also followed the inspiration of Mr. Rhodes, for after the Jameson Raid
Mr. Rhodes was prepared with a new programme for the "progressive
policy" of South Africa, and made use of the formula "Equal rights for
all white people south of the Zambesi." Mr. Rhodes altered this cry
afterwards, with an eye to the coloured vote in the Cape Colony, to
"Equal rights for all civilised persons south of the Zambesi."

In due time the echo resounded from Downing Street "Equal political
rights for all persons in the South African Republic." This formula may
be either desirable or undesirable as a political aspiration in South
Africa. But it is somewhat strange that Mr. Chamberlain should be one of
the leaders of the party in England which has strenuously opposed the
policy of manhood suffrage. In our case, however, Mr. Chamberlain does
not confine himself to friendly advice, but he _demands_ the franchise
for all Uitlanders.

The South African Republic already possesses a franchise law, according
to which every person is entitled to the full franchise after a seven
years' residence in the Republic. But Mr. Chamberlain goes much further,
and claims a far more extensive franchise. On what grounds does he base
his claim?

[Sidenote: The Royal Commission.]

He appeals to the discussions which formed a prelude to the Convention
of 1881. In the discussions, however, mention is only made of burgher
rights or civil rights, with reference to which all possible equality
has continuously existed since the Sand River Conventio