06} In February, 1898, he was elected for the fourth time.

{07} For full text of London Convention, see Appendix B. (July,
1899). A very extensive correspondence has passed on the subject of
the suzerainty. The Transvaal Government now construe the omission of
the Preamble to the 1881 Convention as the result of an agreement to
abolish the suzerainty. Mr. Chamberlain points out that the London
Convention contains specific and not implied amendments of the
Pretoria Convention; that the direct request for abolition of the
suzerainty was refused by Lord Derby; that the preamble as the
fundamental declaration must be deemed to be in force; and that if
not, the same reason which is adduced against the continued existence
of the suzerainty would hold good against the independence of the
Transvaal, for in the preamble of the 1881 Convention alone is any
mention made of either the grant or the reservation.

{08} Written August, 1896.

{09} To those who are not familiar with the conditions of the
country, it will seem incredible that the legislative body could be
'fooled' on such a subject. The extracts from the newspaper reports
of the Raad's proceedings, printed in Appendix D of this volume, will
help them to understand and believe.

{10} The above has been brought up to date for publication,
July, 1899.

{11} Except on the goldfields, where the appointments are made
by Government.

{12} For Volksraad records on this subject see Appendix C.

{13} The decision of the High Court was given in November, 1896, in
favour of the combined companies on all points, and the patents were
thus declared to be invalid!

{14} During the session of '96 the Volksraad decided to put the
bewaarplaatsen up for public auction, the proceeds of the sale to be
divided equally between the Government and the original owners of the
farms on which the bewaarplaatsen had been granted. The _alleged_
reason for this decision is that the areas in question are immensely
valuable, and the State and the owners should profit by them, whilst
the companies should be afforded an opportunity of acquiring them at
a fair price. The _real_ reason is that the companies had refused
to be blackmailed further; and the 'defence' funds not being
forthcoming, the gentlemen of the back-stairs had introduced the
ingenious arrangement safeguarding the original owners' rights,
having previously 'arranged' with the same owners. The excuse that
the areas are too valuable