omitted but that the writer desired to make no alterations in the
original text except in the nature of literary revision.

The writer may be charged by the "peace" party with deliberately
selecting a critical and anxious time as opportune to contribute a
new factor to those already militating against a peaceful settlement.
Two replies could be made to this: one an excuse and one an answer.
It would be an excuse that the writer did not deliberately select
the time of publication, but that the Transvaal Government in its
wisdom chose to impose silence for three years, and that the project
with which their action had interfered was resumed at the earliest
possible moment. The coincidence of another crisis with the date of
emancipation may be an unlucky coincidence, or it may be a result.
But there is neither necessity nor intention to offer excuses. The
responsibility is accepted and the answer is that a case so sound
needs only to be understood, that a recital of the facts must help
to dispel the mists of race prejudice and misunderstanding which are
obscuring the judgment of many; and that a firm but strictly just
and dignified handling of the question by the Imperial Government
is the only possible way to avert a catastrophe in South Africa. It
is essential therefore that first of all the conditions as they are
should be understood; and this record is offered as a contribution
to that end. Let the measure of its truth be the measure of its
usefulness!

The reader is not invited to believe that the case is presented in
such form as it might have been presented by an impartial historian.
It is the Transvaal _from within_, by one who feels all the
injustice and indignity of the position. With the knowledge, however,
that a good case is spoiled by overstatement and with the desire to