THE REAL GRIEVANCES OF THE

UITLANDERS

WHEN I made up my mind to pay a short visit to South Africa, I had not the slightest intention of writing on the subject of the Transvaal, or on any African subject whatever; but before I started several of my friends, both in the House of Commons and others, asked me to try and get information as to the relations between the Boer Government and the gold industry; what they said in effect was this:

We are puzzled by the conflicting accounts we hear: we are told on the one hand that the troubles which have afflicted the gold industry in the Transvaal are not in any way due to the Government. The people interested have brought all these troubles on themselves by mismanagement and over-capitalisation; their grievances are imaginary or sentimental, and they are trying to put the blame of their own mistakes, or worse, on to the Government. On the other hand, we are told that if the Transvaal had been governed decently and in accordance with the most commonplace requirements of modern civilisation, many mines would be now paying which it is now impossible to work; the population of the Transvaal would be double what it is now, and prosperity would reign where distress and poverty are prevalent-in fact, that the present Government in the Transvaal is a disgrace to civilisation. We want to know the real facts of the case. Do try and discover the truth.

During a stay of some weeks at Johannesburg I had every opportunity of studying the facts. All information was placed at my disposal, both sides of the question were laid before me, and I have formed definite opinions on the subject.

Let us now try to examine how far the grievances are imaginary and sentimental. or real and practical.

1. POLITICAL RIGHTS.

We all know how the chapter on Snakes in Ireland began and ended with the words, There are no snakes in Ireland.' Well, the catalogue of the political rights of all the inhabitants of the Transvaal, except a small section of them, begins and ends with the words, 'They have no political rights.' Political power is entirely in the hands of a small clique, the franchise being confined almost entirely to the Dutch farmers, living to a great extent in remote districts, a large

proportion of whom can neither read nor write. Now many different ideas have prevailed in modern times as to who shall be the holders of political power. In most cases, especially in modern republics, it is considered that all householders or ratepayers of full age, who have incurred no personal disability, shall have a right to vote, and that the course of government shall be guided by the views of the majority.

But in the Transvaal the vast majority have no votes; the adult male white population numbers over 60,000, and of these only about 22,000 have votes. It is evident that the word 'republic' is entirely a misnomer. The Transvaal is no more a republic in the true sense of the word than are the empires of Russia and Germany, and a constitutional monarchy like that of England has very much more of the character of a true republic than the constitution of the Transvaal. It is in effect an oligarchy: all power is in the hands of a privileged few, who act as if they had a divine right to dispose of the fortunes and properties of the majority exactly as they think fit.

Power, we read in history, has often been in the hands of a select few, and various qualifications have been thought to justify the monopoly of it.

At one time it was the possession of land, but this is not the case here. On the basis of land value belonging to private individuals, more than half belongs to the Uitlanders.

Those who have no votes hold nearly all the mines, houses, mercantile businesses, freeholds in town, &c. Probably of the wealth of the country not nearly one-tenth is possessed by the holders of political power. Some people would say the best educated should rule. Apply this test.

The Boer farmers, who have the majority of the votes, are notoriously ill educated; not only are many of them unable to read and write, but they live in remote districts, and take no interest in any but local affairs. On the Rand there are many of the most intelligent citizens the world can produce, belonging to many nationsAmericans, Germans, French and Austrians, as well as English. Engineers and chemists, bankers, financiers, men engaged in large mercantile businesses-all these are considered unfit to take any share in public business in the Transvaal. You have accordingly an extremely curious and abnormal state of things. You have the wealth, the education, the energy, the knowledge of the world, the large majority in numbers of the white population on one side, and a small minority, possessing neither education nor wealth nor knowledge of affairs on the other, who claim a divine right to govern the majority, and to dispose of their property as they please.

And this minority is not even united. It is well known that many of them disapprove entirely of the present Government. In fact, it is believed that, deducting the army of officials whose daily

VOL. XLIII-No. 252

Y

bread depends on the favour of the Government, and who form an enormous electioneering force, there would be a clear majority against the Government. At any rate it is evident that the country is governed by a fraction, large or small, of a minority. Truly a state of unstable equilibrium, a pyramid balanced on its apex! Still, it may be objected, it is possible that though there may seem to be great injustice in the way the Government is chosen, yet their laws and their administration are so good that there would be nothing gained by a change.'

I admit at once that if the Boer Government could show that, as compared with the average of modern Governments, the inhabitants of the country would have nothing to gain by a change; that the laws were wise and well administered, the taxation light, and the conditions under which the industries of the country were carried on as favourable as in the majority of civilised countries; then I should agree that the desire for equal political rights was, though a natural wish, yet mainly a sentimental one.

But that brings us to the question: Are the conditions of life worse under Boer rule than they are elsewhere, and than they should be?

To answer this we must consider the complaints of the Uitlanders seriatim.

1. Taxation. The grievance with regard to taxation is that the Government is alleged to exact from the people an annual sum far in excess of what would be necessary to carry on the administration of the country according to the most civilised ideas; in fact, that while in 1896 the sum of 3,584,235l. 168. 7d. was spent by the Government, a sum of 1,500,000l. ought to have sufficed, or at any rate that 2,000,000l. ought to have been far more than sufficient. If that is correct, then, a sum largely exceeding a million and a half sterling was raised and spent which ought to have remained in the pockets of the people. Let us see what is spent by the three other States of South Africa, which are certainly not worse governed than the Transvaal. To compare this expenditure we must of course deduct working expenditure on railways. The railways in Natal and Cape Colony belong to the Government, are worked by them, and all the working expenditure and maintenance of the railways appears in their budget. The Transvaal Government does not own or work the railways, and therefore no working or maintenance expenses are included in their accounts. We must also, to make a fair comparison, exclude annual interest on debt; a large portion of the debt of Natal and the Cape Colony having been raised for the purpose of making railways and other productive works, the interest on which is paid for out of the profits. The expenditure therefore given below includes the whole yearly expenditure of these four States, working

expenses and maintenance of State railways, and interest on national debt being excluded in each case.

When one sees the average amount per annum on which these States have managed to exist, and the appalling rate at which the Transvaal expenditure has increased, the taxpayers have certainly a right to some explanation.

That is to say, that these three States, with an area of 347,358 square miles and a population of 2,485,164, are spending between them a yearly sum of 3,620,098/., while the Transvaal alone in 1896 has spent 3,584,235l. 168. 7d., although it has only an area of 113,642 square miles and a population of 795,397.

The increase in the expenditure of the Transvaal has been as follows:

2. Dynamite. The grievance with regard to dynamite is perhaps of a more irritating and exasperating character than that of taxation; for while it is extremely annoying to have demanded from you double the amount necessary for the good government of the State, yet the money is theoretically, at any rate, raised for the purpose of administration and for the good of the inhabitants of the country; but in the case of the dynamite monopoly, with the exception of 58. per case, and a small share of profit, which is supposed to be received by the Government, the whole of the money forcibly extracted from the gold industry goes into the pockets of private individuals for the most part not even residing in the Transvaal, while such portion of the plunder as goes into the pockets of persons residing in the Transvaal

From the Cape Statistical Register, p. 75.

† From the Natal Statistical Year Book, pp. D3 and D5. Figures kindly supplied by Sir William Dunn, Bart., M.P.

From the English edition of the Report of the Industrial Commission, issued by the Witwatersrand Chamber of Mines, Johannesburg, p. 571.

goes into their private purse for their private advantage, and in no case into the coffers of the State.

So many attempts have been made to draw red herrings across the scent of this dynamite monopoly, that I had better quote verbatim from the Report of the Commission :-

It has, we consider, been clearly proved that the price paid by the mines for explosives of all kinds is unreasonably high.'

That the principal explosives used here (blasting gelatine and, to a small extent, dynamite) can be purchased in Europe, and delivered here at a price far below the present cost to the mines, has been proved to us by the evidence of many witnesses competent to speak on the subject; and when we bear in mind that the excess charge of 40s. to 45s. per case does not benefit the State, but serves to enrich individuals for the most part resident in Europe, the injustice of such a tax on the staple industry becomes more apparent and demands immediate removal.

It has been proved that the South African Republic is one of the largest, if not the largest consumer of explosives in the world, and, according to the rule of commerce in such cases, it is reasonable to suppose that the most advantageous terms would be secured for so large a consumer. This, no doubt, would be the case were it not for the monopoly now in the hands of the South African Explosives Company, whereby they and their friends make enormous profits at the expense of the mining industry. These profits have been estimated by the Volksraad Dynamite Commission at no less than 580,000l. for the year 1897 and 1898, being 21. per case on 290,000 cases, the number which it is estimated would have to be imported to meet the demands for those years.

...

This explosive, whether costing 238. 6d. or 298. 6d. in Hamburg, is supplied to the mines at 858. per case, showing a profit of 478. 6d. in one case, and 41s. 6d. in the other, of which this Government receives 58. per case. That this is a reasonable estimate is supported by the Report of the Volksraad Dynamite Commission, who state that the Company makes a profit of 21. per case on imported dynamite, and further by the evidence of a former agent of Nobel's Dynamite Trust, whose statement was to the effect that he made an offer on behalf of Nobel's to deliver dynamite ex magazine on the Rand at 40s. per case of 50 pounds, excluding duty, and this at a time when it had to be brought a considerable distance by oxwagons.2

In the case of blasting gelatine, which is now more largely used than No. 1 dynamite, the margin of profit made by the Company at the expense of the mines is far greater. . . .

The mining industry has thus to bear a burden which does not enrich the State or bring any benefit in return, and this fact must always prove a source of irritation and annoyance to those who, while willing to contribute to just taxation for the general good, cannot acquiesce in an impost of the nature complained of. . . .

Another point that has been brought to the notice of your Commission is the prejudicial effect exercised by this monopoly in practically excluding from the country all new inventions in connection with explosives, and, in view of the numerous dynamite accidents that have taken place from time to time, it is to be regretted that it is not possible to make satisfactory trials of other and less dangerous explosives for the working of mines.3

The reader must remember that this Commission was appointed by the Boer Government, and that the report was signed unanimously by all the members of it, including such prominent members of the executive as General Joubert and Mr. Schalk Burger, chairman, Mr. Report of Industrial Commission before cited, p. 451. 2 Ibid. p. 452. 3 Ibid. p. 453.