Boer Politics by Yves Guyot
page 100 of 167 (59%)
page 100 of 167 (59%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
settled. On August 28th Mr. Chamberlain replies. Concerning the
suzerainty, he refers to his despatch of July 13th; he consents to discuss the Constitution of a Tribunal of Arbitration from which Foreign Powers, and foreign influence, shall be excluded; he concludes by proposing a fresh Conference. What is the reply of the Boer Government on September 2nd? The withdrawal of its proposals of August 19th and 21st, relative to the five years' Franchise and increase of number of seats in the Volksraad. Thus, at the end of three months' negotiations, no conclusion had been arrived at. It is to this despatch of September 2nd, that Mr. Chamberlain's despatch of September 8th, replies; in that despatch he states, that he is still prepared to accept the proposals of August 19th concerning the Franchise, provided that the enquiry by a Commission, joint or unilateral, prove that the law is workable. The representation of Uitlanders in the Volksraad, is, of course, only possible on condition that they had the right to make use of the English language. On September 23rd, the Transvaal Government replies that the _taal_, a language not spoken by any but Boers, is to remain the only language used in the Volksraad, and in dilatory phraseology paves the way for the ultimatum of October 9th. Here we have a summary of the negotiations relating to the franchise, from the time of the Bloemfontein Conference. |
|