The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo. TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 1900. THE REBEL DUTCH.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 132, 5 June 1900, Page 4

The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo.

TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 1900.

THE REBEL DUTCH.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the Tirrsng that need- resistanc., For the futuro ia the distance, And the food ti_at vs can do.

A few weeks ago Sir Alfred Milner, High Commissioner of South Africa, was presented by the ministers of the .Non-conformist churches in and around Capetown with an address expressive of confidence in his management of a great crisis ; and of personal esteem. During the course of his reply the High Commissioner said that, in considering the settlement, "Never Again" must be the motto of all thinking, of all humane men. He went on to assert that he did not wish to join in the outcry against "the fine old virtue of magnanimity; and in this connection he made the following remark:—"We can show it (magnanimity) by striving to take care that our treatment of those who have been guilty of rebellion, while characterised by a just severity towards the' really guilty parties, should be devoid of any spirit of vindictiveness or of race-prejudice.'' This is a somewhat vague pronouncement on what is the most vital question of the day of reckon-, ing after the war.

The Boers of the Orange Free State and Transvaal have practically been acknowledged by Britain as bona fide belligerents, and as such are entitled to all the consideration accorded a foreign enemy. Had tht suzerainty exercised over the Transvaal been insisted on, the burghers under arms could strictly have been spoken of as rebels, and lawfully treated as such. ' But no punishment will be meted out to any Free State or Transvaal Boer. Jn bearing arms against Britain they will be regarded as having simply dove their duty, and only the Executive are in danger of retributive justice,

The case of the rebel Dutch of Natal and (Jape Colony is vastly different. Imagine for one moment the foreign residents of iSew Zealand, who have enjoyed the fall privileges of their fellow colonists, actively co-operating'in an invasion of our land by a foreign foe.- Almost analogous has been the action of a large section of the colonial Dutch; their only pretext and excuse the ties of race. Whether resident in Natal or in Cape Colony, they have always enjoyed the full privileges of their j_.nglish-born fellow colonists. This equality of civic rights is amply attested by. the fact of the Administration of Cape Colony being returned to.of Ace by. and wholly- representative of, the Dutch element. Yet some fifteen thousand —an accurate estimate is as yet difficult to make —have taken up" arms against the flag under which they have been nurtured, and enjoyed every freedom of one of the most liberal constitutions of the world. Many more, 1. eking the courage to actively throw off the cloak of loyalty, have assisted the enemy in secret ways. Information of our army's movements conveyed to the enemy, destruction of bridges and stores, are charges which are to be laid at their doors. Others again rebel in heart if not in deed, have by expression of nndis.rui.-ed sympathy for the enemy, and open manifestation of their intention of using all political influence and expedients for shielding those who. ennghi in active participation, come before ihe Courts.shown that it is only a craven spirit and white liver has prevented them shouldering a gnn. A trains, the latter Kipling has powerfully inveighed. Unfortunately, they are likely to entirely escape the punish-

nient they so richly deserve. Of the others—those whose activity against their country's flag can be proven— we sincerely trust. that Sir Alfred Milner does not suggest that, they j are fitting objects for the exercise : of. "the line old virtue of magnanimity.'" Punishment, condign and severe, should be their portion. British policy has too often in cases of this sort been inadvisedly and un- : duly conciliatory. In the affair of; '81 the loyalist Dutch received no; reward; while consideration was! shown the actively disaffected- even, to the disadvantage of those who; had supported Britain's cause. It! was mistaken conciliation. Look at j the case of the present struggle. Loyalty in Xorthern Cape Colony and some parts of Natal did not pay at the beginning of the war. A vivid recollection of England's mistaken generosity on a previous occasion was responsible for this To it may also be ascribed tho defection of many who would, had a wiser policy prevailed in 1881, at least have remained outwardly, if not strictly, neutral.

The penalty of active disloyalty in time of war is death. A short shrift, both under the Roman-Dutch law of the Cape and the code of England, is given rebels. Though justified by law, such a drastic form of retribution is, for many reasons out of the question. The world today, aghast, would rise in anna against a modern Jeffreys. The imprisonment of from ten to twenty thousand persons is also impossible. It would not be a kindness to loyalists to tax them to maintain in State penitentiaries an appreciabe fraction of the population. Severe sentences have already been inflicted in more flagrant cases, but such punishment must necessarily be more or less restricted. Confiscation of land, another possible form of penalty, is not advisable in a country where a black race predominates. Twenty thousand "mean whites" would be very undesirable additions to South Africa's population. There is. however, one way of penalising the rebel Dutch that will fulfil .all requirements. It is to strip them of all civil rights until such time as they shall in some manner have retrieved their treason. Such a course is simple and effective; it is also sufficiently drastic for all but the ring-leaders of disloyalty. We trust no mistaken ideas of magnanimity will obtain when the case of the rebels of Xatnl and Cape Colony conies up for consideration.