CHARGES AGAINST COLONIALS.

Gisborne Times, Volume V, Issue 4, 5 January 1901, Page 1

CHARGES AGAINST COLONIALS.

AN EXPLANATION INCOBEECT IN

DETAIL.

By Telegraph—Press Association— Copyright, Melbourne, Jan. 4,

A letter received from a member of Brabant’s Horse throws light on Mr Bryn Boberts’ charges against the South African oo'onial troops. The writer states:—“ln October, last year, the Kaffrarian Bifles and Border Horse struck and laid down thenarms. Their colonel threatened to put the Cape Mounted Bifles’ gun on to them. They said they would give them fight for it if they attempted such a thing; so you can imagine there was fair mutiny. All those who refused duty were taken prisoners,-and in face of the enemy put off the field in disgrace. They declined to give up their arms on the ground that they were necessary for their protection, but their horses, saddles, and bridles were taken. I believe they had to go before Lord Boberts on a charge of mutiny while on active service. -, [With reference to the above the letter from the member of Brabant’s Horse, dealin" with the alleged mutiny of the Kaffrarian Bifles and Border Horse, is scarcely correct in detail. A difficulty did arise with the regiments named, but the irouble arose on account of a misunderstanding as to the conditions under which the men enlisted. Many of the men signed on for a year, and at the inception of the campaign were informed that in return for their loyalty they would be among the first of the colonials to be discharged and allowed to resume their businesses at Johannesburg and Pretoria. At the expiration of the year, in October, several of the South African refugees who had not

participated in any fighting were allowed to return to Johannesburg, and the colonials naturally resented this apparent breach of faith on the part of the military authorities. They lodged a formal objection to the course adopted, and in return were told to consider themselves under arrest until tbe.matter was inquired into. There was no disgracing of the men as alleged. The Field Marshal and Lord Kitchener investigated the ease, and the misunderstanding and anomaly soon became apparent. Lord Roberts spoke very kindly to the men, and promised them fairer treatment, while no further preference was shown to any refugees who had businesses in the cities. Most of the. sensational statements that now appear in the Press are highly exaggerated accounts forwarded by members of African Colonial regiments, among which considerable jealousy existed.]