A friend writes:—­“In order to satisfy my own mind I have been looking in Latin Dictionaries for the correct and original meaning of ‘impero,’ (I govern,) and ‘imperium.’  The word ‘Empire’ has an unpleasant ring from some points of view and to some minds.  One thinks of Roman Emperors, Domitian, Nero, Tiberius,—­of the word ‘imperious,’ and of the French ‘Empire’ under Napoleon I. and Napoleon III.  The Latin word means ‘the giving of commands.’  All depends on whether the commands given are good, and the giver of them also good and wise.  The Ten Commandments are in one sense ‘imperial.’  Now, I think the word as used in the phrase British Empire has, in the most modern and best sense, quite a different savour or flavour from that of Napoleon’s Empire, or the Turkish or Mahommedan Empires of the past.  It has come to mean the ‘Dominion of Freedom’ or the ‘Reign of Liberty,’ rather than the giving of despotic or tyrannical or oligarchic commands.  In fact, our Imperialism is freedom for all races and peoples who choose to accept it, whilst Boer Republicanism is the exact opposite.  How strangely words change their weight and value!

“And yet there still remains the sense of ‘command’ in ‘Empire;’ and in the past history of our Government of the Cape Colony there has been too little wholesome command and obedience, and too much opportunism, shuffling off of responsibility, with self-sufficient ignorance and doctrinaire foolishness taking the place of knowledge and insight.  Want of courage is, I think, in short, at the bottom of the past mismanagement.”

* * * * *

The assertion is repeatedly made that “England coveted the gold of the Transvaal, and hence went to war.”  It is necessary it seems, again and again, to remind those who speak thus that England was not the invader.  Kruger invaded British Territory, being fully prepared for war.  England was not in the least prepared for war.  This last fact is itself a complete answer to those who pretend that she was the aggressor.

In regard to the assertion that “England coveted the gold of the Transvaal,” what is here meant by “England?” Ours is a representative Government.  Are the entire people, with their representatives in Parliament and the Government included in this assertion, or is it meant that certain individuals, desiring gold, went to the Transvaal in search of it?  The expression “England” in this relation, is vague and misleading.

The search for gold is not in itself a legal nor a moral offence.  But the inordinate desire and pursuit of wealth, becoming the absorbing motive to the exclusion of all nobler aims, is a moral offence and a source of corruption.