Had Sir T. Shepstone’s power been as great as represented, it is fair to suppose that it would have been exerted, and would have prevailed in support of his own administration; but it seems clear that he could do nothing; and as to the reality of the danger, nothing could better establish that than the unpleasant admissions in the foregoing extract and the initial disasters in the Zulu War a year later.  The Boers’ protective power was not lessened by the annexation—­quite otherwise.  It was supplemented by British money, arms, and soldiers, and the prestige of the British flag, and yet things happened as above described.  What would they have been under the old conditions?

The day before he issued the proclamation Sir T. Shepstone sent a messenger to Cetewayo, telling him that the Transvaal would be under British sovereignty, and warning him against aggression in that direction.  Cetewayo replied:  ’I thank my father Somtseu (Shepstone) for his message.  I am glad that he has sent it, because the Dutch have tired me out, and I intended to fight with them once, only once, and to drive them over the Vaal.  Kabana, you see my impis are gathered.  It was to fight the Dutch I called them together.  Now I will send them back to their houses.’ (C. 1883, p. 19.)

Colonel A.W.  Durnford; R.E., in a memorandum of July 5, 1877, wrote: 

About this time (April 10) Cetewayo had massed his forces in three corps on the borders, and would undoubtedly have swept the Transvaal, country not been taken over by the English.  In my opinion, he would have cleared the country to Pretoria.

‘I am convinced,’ wrote Sir A. Cunynghame, June 12, from Pretoria, ’that had this country not been annexed, it would have been ravaged by the native tribes.  Forty square miles of country had been overrun by natives, and every house burned, just before the annexation.’  And he wrote again, July 6:  ’Every day convinces me that unless this country had been annexed it would have been a prey to plunder and rapine from the natives on its border, joined by Secocoeni, Mapok, and other tribes in the Transvaal.  Feeling the influence of the British Government, they are now tranquil.’

So much for the reality of the danger.  As to the causes of it and the alleged responsibility of Natal, Sir Bartle Frere, in a letter to General Ponsonby, made the following remarks: 

The fact is, that while the Boer Republic was a rival and semi-hostile power, it was a Natal weakness rather to pet the Zulus as one might a tame wolf, who only devoured one’s neighbour’s sheep.  We always remonstrated, but rather feebly; and now that both flocks belong to us, we are rather embarrassed in stopping the wolf’s ravages.

Sir B. Frere realized fully the dangers, and gave his testimony as to Boer opinion.  On December 15, 1877, he wrote, concerning his policy towards the Zulus: 

My great anxiety is, of course, to avoid collision, and I am satisfied that the only chance I have of keeping clear of it is to show that I do not fear it.  The Boers are, of course, in a state of great apprehension, and I have ordered those of the two frontier districts of Utrecht and Wakkerstroom to hold themselves in readiness, should I find it necessary to call upon them for active service.