THE ORIGIN OF THE MOVEMENT.

Having failed in their constitutional attempts to secure a reasonable voice in the government, or any redress of their grievances, there came the time when men’s thoughts naturally turned to the last expedient—­force.  Up to and so late as the Volksraad Session of 1895 a constitutional agitation for rights had been carried on by the Transvaal National Union, a body representing the unenfranchised portion of the population.  Of its members but few belonged to the class of wealthy mine and land owners:  they had so far abstained from taking any part in a political organization which was viewed with dislike and suspicion by the Government and the great majority of the Boers.  It has been asserted by a few Progressive members of the Raad that many of the Boers were themselves opposed to the policy adopted towards the newcomers; but, whilst this may be to some extent true, it is more than questionable whether any of the burghers were willing to concede a share in the power of government, although it is certain that great numbers would not have taken active steps against the Uitlanders but for the invasion by a foreign force.  Any extending of the franchise means to the great majority of the Boers a proportionate loss of independence.

When the matter of the Independence of the Republic is discussed it must not be forgotten that independence conveys something to the Boers which is radically different from what it means to anyone else.  That the State should continue for ever to be independent and prosperous—­a true republic—­would be mockery heaped on injury if the absolute domination by the Boer party should cease; and when the parrot-like cry of ‘The Independence of the State is threatened’ is raised again and again a propos of the most trivial measures and incidents, this idea is the one that prompts it.  Instances innumerable could be quoted seemingly illustrating the Boer legislators’ inability to distinguish between simple measures of reform and justice, and measures aimed at undermining the State’s stability and independence.  It is not stupidity!  It is that the Boer realizes at least one of the inevitable consequences of reform—­that the ignorant and incapable must go under.  Reform is the death-knell of his oligarchy, and therefore a danger to the independence of the State—­as he sees it.  Until the European people who have lately become so deeply concerned in Transvaal affairs realize how widely divergent are the two interpretations of ‘Independence,’ they will not have begun to understand the Transvaal Question.

The National Union did not represent any particular class in the Uitlander community.  It was formed of men drawn from all classes who felt that the conditions of life were becoming intolerable, and that something would have to be done by the community to bring about reforms which the legislature showed no signs of voluntarily introducing.