the opinion was at that time; and if it be deemed that overmuch space
is given to this matter, the answer is, that it is quoted now as the
crime which gave rise to the present hatred and mistrust of England,
and it is all-important that the truth should be clear.

This is what Mr. J.F. Celliers, the patriotic editor of the Boer
newspaper, _De Volksstem_, wrote in reviewing the work of the special
session of the Volksraad, convened to deal with the questions of Lord
Carnarvon's Federation Bill, and the rescuing of the country from
ruin and chaos:--'During the session we have repeatedly had occasion
to comment on the doings of the Raad. These comments have not been
favourable, and we regret to say that we have found in the closing
scenes of our Legislature no reason to alter our opinions.' Then
follows a scathing account of the 'work done,' in which occur such
references as:--'With the exception of a couple of members,
no one had the sense or manliness to go into the question of
confederation'; and 'The most surprising feature of the whole
affair was this--that most of the speakers seemed not to have the
faintest conception of the desperate condition in which the country
stood....' And again, under date of March 28: 'About three months
ago we said we would prefer confederation under the British flag if
the state of anarchy then threatening were to continue. We know that
a good and stable Government is better than anarchy any day.'

It is noteworthy that the writer of the above is the same Mr.
Celliers who, two years later, was put in gaol by Colonel Lanyon on a
charge of sedition, because he attacked the Administration for its
failure to keep the promises made at the time of annexation.

Three thousand out of eight thousand voters actually signed petitions