CO885-(13-15) — Page 531

25910.

No. 160.

(SOUTH AFRICA.)

SIR,

LAW OFFICERS To COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice, December 1, 1897.

We were honoured with your comtnands signified in Mr. Wingfield's letter of the 26th ultimo stating that with reference to our previous Reports in the case of the Critic newspaper, he was directed by you to transmit to us further correspondence with Messrs. Guedalla and Cross, together with the draft of a letter which it was proposed to send to those gentlemen, and the draft of a despatch to the High Commissioner for

South Africa.

That the latter draft we should see was substantially the same as that in which we had already expressed our concurrence, but that the concluding portion had been amended in consequence of the representations of Messrs. Guedalla and Cross.

That Mr. Wingfield was to enquire whether we approved of the draft letter and of the amended draft despatch.

We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your commands, have the honour to

Report-

That, as altered and initialled by us, we approve of the draft letter to Messrs. Guedalla and Cross, and also of the draft despatch to the High Commissioner.

The Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.,

&c.,

&c.,

&c.

We have, &c.,

RICHARD E. WEBSTER. ROBERT B. FINLAY.

DRAFT.

:

(South Africa.)

No.

High Commissioner,

SIR.

Sir ALFRED MILNER, G.C.M.G., K.C.B.

}

Downing Street,

November, 1897.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch, No. 464, of the

13th of May, containing the reply of the Government of the South African Republic to the representations made to them by Her Majesty's Agent on behalf of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the suppression of the Critic newspaper. This reply (which

is dated the 7th of May, or nearly three months after Mr. Greene's protest) can scarcely be expected to furnish a satisfactory answer, inasmuch as it contains little more than on assertion that the President had the right to suppress the newspaper, and that his action in the case was justified. I am at a loss to understand how the former plea can now be put forward, in view of the judgment of the High Court of the South African Republic in the case of the Star, delivered on the 14th of April, 1897, in which it was laid down that the Law, No. 26, of 1896, does not empower the President to suppress the publication of matter not already printed and published.

You

I request that you will point out to the Government of the South African Republic that it is a necessary conclusion from the judgment in the case of the Star that, the President was not entitled to issue the order suppressing the Critic for six months. You should also point out that there has been nothing in the antecedents of the Critic to justify the making of such an order even if there were power in a proper case to make it. should inform the Government of the South African Republic and inform them that Her Majesty's Government are compelled to put forward a claim for compensation to Mr. Hess, the proprietor of that newspaper, for the losses he has suffered by the illegal interference with-the-carrying on of his business-in-accordance with-Article-XIV:-of-the-London Convention; in consequence of the illegal action of the Government of the South African Republic. Her Majesty's Government will be content to leave the amount of that compensation to be

15191-25-12/07 Wt 20260 D & S 5

ImC.O. 885

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE

1