a savage state would allow. The Government of Natal had no right to
dictate the terms to a Zulu king on which he was to hold his throne. The
Zulu nation was an independent nation, and had never been conquered or
annexed by Natal. If the Government of that colony was able by friendly
negotiation to put a stop to Zulu slaughter, it was a matter for
congratulation on humanitarian grounds; but it is difficult to follow
the argument that because it was not able, or was only partially able,
to do so, therefore England was justified in making war on the Zulus.
On the other hand, it is perfectly ludicrous to observe the way in which
Cetywayo's advocates overshoot the mark in arguing this and similar
points; especially his lady advocates, whose writings upon these
subjects bear about the same resemblance to the truth that the speech to
the jury by the counsel for the defence in a hopeless murder case does
to the summing up of the judge. Having demonstrated that the engagements
entered into by Cetywayo meant nothing, they will proceed to show that,
even if they did, cold-blooded murder, when perpetrated by a black
paragon like Cetywayo, does not amount to a great offence. In the mouths
of these gentle apologists for slaughter, massacre masquerades under the
name of "executions," and is excused on the plea of being, "after all,"
only the enforcement of "an old custom." Again, the employment of
such phrases, in a solemn answer to a remonstrance from the
Lieutenant-Governor of Natal, as "I do kill; but do not consider that
I have done anything yet in the way of killing. . . . I have not yet
begun; I have yet to kill," are shown to mean nothing at all, and to be
"nothing more than the mere irritation of the moment."[*] Perhaps those
of Cetywayo's subjects who suffered on account of this mere momentary
irritation took a more serious view of it. It is but fair to the
particular authority from whom I quote (Miss Colenso's "History of the
Zulu War," pp. 230-231) to state that she considers this reply from
the "usually courteous and respectful king" as "no doubt petulant and