very dreadful, and yet he never destroyed a single family. The reason he
has himself given for this conduct is that he did not wish to irritate
the white man; that he had not made the war, and was only anxious to
defend his country.

When the fighting came to an end after the battle of Ulundi, there
were two apparent courses open to us to take. One was to take over
the country and rule it for the benefit of the Zulus, and the other to
enforce the demands in Sir Bartle Frere's ultimatum, and, taking such
guarantees as circumstances would admit of, leave Cetywayo on the
throne. Instead of acting on either of these plans, however, Sir Garnet
Wolseley proceeded, in the face of an extraordinary consensus of adverse
opinion, which he treated with calm contempt, to execute what has proved
to be a very cruel settlement. Sir Garnet Wolseley has the reputation of
being an extremely able man, and it is only fair to him to suppose that
he was not the sole parent of this political monster, by which all the
blood and treasure expended on the Zulu war were made of no account, but
that it was partially dictated to him by authorities at home, who were
anxious to gratify English opinion, and partly ignorant, partly
careless of the consequences. At the same time, it is clear that he is
responsible for the details of the scheme, since immediately after the
capture of Cetywayo he writes a despatch about them which was considered
so important, that a member of his staff was sent to England in
charge of it. In this document he informs the Secretary of State that
Cetywayo's rule was resolutely built up "without any of the ordinary and
lawful foundations of authority, and by the mere vigour and vitality of
an individual character." It is difficult to understand what Sir Garnet
means in this passage. If the fact of being the rightful and generally
accepted occupant of the throne is not an "ordinary and lawful
foundation of authority," what is? As regards Cetywayo having built up