CO885-(13-15) — Page 377

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

NEPEEPIC.O. 885

I l l l l l l l l l l l l

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

2

declined to defer to the objections of the German Government on the subject, a course in which Germany finally acquiesced.

That the so-called "Commando " system was described in the Law Officers' Report of 1876. That it had existed in the South African Republic ever since its foundation. but that the law at present in force dated from 1883. That a translation was enclosed. That it would be seen that the language of the law was not very clear or consistent. But that your Lordship did not desire to raise any question as to whether it had been exceeded in particular cases, or whether it was effectual for its purpose as generally understood. That, if any point of construction could be made against its application to British subjects as a class, or to individuals belonging to that class, the persons *affected had had an opportunity of making it in the local courts of law, whose opinion was understood to have been in favour of the Republic upon the main question of law and competency. That your Lordship saw no present reason to doubt the impartiality of those Courts.

That the question on which our opinion was desired was, therefore, as follows:-- Assuming the Municipal Law of 1883 to be so framed as to render British subjects liable in terms to compulsory military service, and assuming its provisions to have been observed by the local authorities, is there nevertheless any valid reason to object to its application to British subjects on grounds of International law or comity; in other words, do we agree with the views of our predecessors, and do your Lordship's telegrams and your Lordship's Despatch of the 8th ultimo treat the matter on a sound! legal basis ?

That as the matter was urgent, and might be raised in the House of Commons at an carly date, your Lordship would be glad to receive our report as soon as possible.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands, we have considered the matter, and have the honour to

Report-

That, in our opinion, on the assumption as to the Municipal Law suggested at the close of Mr. Fairfield's letter, there is no valid reason to object to its application to British subjects on the ground of International law and comity.

We agree with our predecessors and are of opinion that the telegrams and the Despatch of your Lordship of the 8th ultimo treat the matter on a sound legal basis.

The Most Hon.

The Marquess of Ripon, K.G.

&C &c., &c.

We have, &c. (Signed) JOHN BIGBY,

R. T. REID.

PROOF.

11576.

MY LORD,

No. 67..

(SOUTH AFRICA.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice, July 3, 1894. WE were honoured with your Lordship's commands signified in Mr. Fairfield's letter of the 28th ultimo stating that he was directed by your Lordship to request us to favour you with our opinion on the question whether Her Majesty's suzerainty still existed in relation to the South African Republic, a point on which Her Majesty's Government had been challenged in Parliament to give an answer in a manner which made it difficult to avoid doing so.

That, in the first place, Mr. Fairfield was to observe that the word " suzerainty," which was borrowed from the terminology of the feudal system where it had a sufficiently definite meaning, was not a very apt term to apply to any recognised system of relationship between two modern States, each possessing constitutional Government, and was not susceptible of a precise definition. That it had been remarked of it that it "may mean anything from the white palfrey of the King of Naples to full dominion."

That the South African Republic was founded by a number of British subjects of Dutch and Huguenot descent who, in order to escape from the restraints of British rule, migrated to the north of the Vaal river, ie., beyond the limits of Her Majesty's dominions. That after some years it was decided to come to a friendly understanding with those emigrant farmers, and that that was done by an instrument known as “ the Sand River Convention" dated 15th April 1852.

That the persons, whose right to manage their own affairs and govern themselves without any interference on the part of the Queen's Government, was thus recognised, were at the time divided into three governmental groups, but that early in 1858 they amalgamated themselves into one State, known as the "South African Republic."

That the Republic was practically recognised by this and other countries as an independent foreign State until the 12th of April 1877, when the country was annexed on behalf of the Queen by Sir Theophilus Shepstone, whose act was ratified by Her Majesty's Government, the country being thenceforth administered, without physical resistance, as a British Crown Colony until towards the end of 1880, when a large part of the adult male population broke out into open insurrection. That after various engagements between the insurgents and the British forces, a preliminary treaty of peace was agreed to on the 21st of March 1881, between the British General, Sir ' Evelyn Wood, and the Transvaal leaders, of whom the principal was Mr. Paul Kruger, who for the last thirteen years has been the State President of the revived Republic.

That in Blue Book C. 3114 of the year 1882, we should find at pages 49-51 a full record of the negotiations between Sir Evelyn Wood and the leaders, which proceeded on the basis that the people of the Transvaal were to be granted self-government, subject to Her Majesty's suzerainty. That during the discussion Mr. Kruger said “1 accept suzerainty as explained by General Wood" (p. 51) and that Sir Evelyn Wood's explanation was set forth at the top of the following page (Annexure S.). That it was in the following words :-

"Suzerainty means: That the country has entire self-government as regards its own internal affairs, but that it cannot take action against, or, with, an outside power without the permission of the suzerain."

That that preliminary agreement being arrived at, the Transvaal forces broke laager and dispersed to their homes, it being left to the leaders to negotiate a definite and formal arrangement with a duly appointed Royal Commission. That those later negotiations took shape in the instrument known as the Pretoria Convention (see pp. 37 to 44 of Blue Book C. 3114).

That it would be seen that that instrument had no preamble or recital but began at once with an operativo clause, bearing no number, granting self-government, subject to the suzerainty of the British Crown and to the conditions and limitations set forth in a series of Articles numbered from 1 to 33, the acceptance of the arrangement being contained in a concluding clause, also unnumbered, inserted below the signatures of the British Commissioners and itself signed by the Transvaal representatives.

85965.-89. 6.--1/96.