author of the "bordereau," therefore he was not responsible for the
documents named in the "bordereau."

In this case, in like manner, there is but one question:--Has or has not
the government of the South African Republic acted up to the convention
of 1884, and is the English government bound to regard that convention
as of no effect with regard to the Uitlanders who have established
themselves in the Transvaal on the faith that England would insist upon
its being respected?


_Pro-Boer Argument._

Pro-Boers refuse to recognise this point, as did M. Cavaignac when, in
his speech of July 7th, 1898, he abandoned the "bordereau" to substitute
for it the Henry forgery.

They keep talking of the Great Trek of 1836; of England's greed; of the
gold mines; and, above all, of the Jameson raid. The Jameson raid is
their pet grievance; it takes the place of all argument. The Uitlanders
may well say that "Jameson has been Krüger's best friend."

Notwithstanding, the Jameson raid is the best proof of the powerlessness
of England to protect the interests of her subjects against the
pretentions of the Pretoria Government.

In 1894, Lord Ripon had already made ineffectual representations to that
Government concerning the contempt with which it was treating the
Convention of 1884.