CO885-(11-13) — Page 548

16548.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

CO.

Reference :--

885

12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

MY LORD,

No. 265A. (TRANSVAAL.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Temple, September 15, 1881.

We were honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Meade's letter of the 5th instant, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to acknowledge the receipt of our letter of the 26th ultimo, which reported that we were of opinion that the treaties and contracts made with foreign Powers by the former South African Republic would not revive after the ratification of the Convention with the Boer leaders.

That a further question had, however, been since raised, which appeared to your Lordship to require consideration, namely, whether the treaties which then existed between the South African Republic and foreign Powers were actually extinguished by the Act of Annexation, and whether it might not be held that the terms of the proclamation then issued by Sir Theophilus Shepstone (and which was afterwards approved by Her Majesty's Government) effectually recognised and continued such treaties in force. That if this contention be valid, it was argued that such treaties would continue to be binding upon Her Majesty, although only to the extent of the resources of the Transvaal territory, and so far as they were not inconsistent with the terms of the recent Convention.

That that view of the case was expounded in a Minute annexed to Mr. Meade's letter, to which Mr. Meade was to invite our attention and to request that we would be good enough to advise your Lordship at our early convenience on the following points:

(a.) Whether if under the Sand River Convention, or otherwise, the South African Republic possessed the right of concluding treaties with foreign Powers, in our opinion such treaties became extinguished by the Act of Annexation of the South African Republic to Her Majesty's Dominions, and, if not. whether they were continued and made binding on Her Majesty by the terms of Sir T. Shepstone's proclamation and Her Majesty's subsequent approval of its terms.

(b.) That if they were so continued and made binding upon Her Majesty, whether they would remain in force after the ratification of the recent Convention, so far as they were not inconsistent with the terms of that Convention.

(c.) And generally that your Lordship would be obliged by any observations or

suggestions which might occur to us upon the subject.

That Mr. Meade was to enclose-

(a.) A copy of the Sand River Convention.

(b.) A copy of the proclamation issued by Sir T. Shepstone, and his subsequent exposition of its meaning to Mr. Bürgers on the annexation of the South African Republic.

(c.) A copy of the Convention recently concluded with the Boer leaders, but not yet

ratified.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to

Report

(a.) That we are of opinion that if under the Sand River Convention, or otherwise, the South African Republic possessed the right of concluding treaties with foreign Powers (which appears to have been the case) such treaties did not become extinguished by the Act of Annexation of the South African Republic to Her Majesty's Dominions, but continued to be binding on Her Majesty.

(b.) We think that until abrogated or modified they will remain in force after the ratification of the recent Convention, so far as they are not inconsistent with the terms of that Convention.

(c.) No further observations or suggestions occur to us on the subject.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Kimberley.

We have, &c. (Signed) HENRY JAMES.

FARRER HERSCHELL.

[TSH° 4!++ ?ཀ

0 162*8.-G05. 25. - 8. 85.

1

1