AFRICAN PROTECTORATES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22775, 8 July 1937, Page 10

AFRICAN PROTECTORATES

: j Just returned from his visit to j London, General Hertzog has voiced | his disappointment because the British Government is not yet ready to transfer to the Union of South Africa the three native protectorj ates, Basutoland, Bechuanaland and | Swaziland. This is an old subject j and an old grievance, but General : Hertzog has now adopted a tone of j impatience more vehement than before. Actually the transfer of the territories was provided for in the South Africa Act, 1909, the legislation by which the Union was constituted. Certain conditions and safeguards are laid down in the schedule to this Act, but it has been suggested, without serious challenge, that, with the passing of the Statute of Westminster, and the status of the Union Act, they could not be imposed on South Africa. At the same time the position is peculiar, for it is not easy to see how the protectorates could be transferred except by the British Government. The alternative of formal annexation by the Union would mean going far | further than General Hertzog is [ likely to contemplate, or to be able to manage against the outraged opinion of a considerable section of his own people. He hints at a direct appeal to the King—as King in South Africa, of course —but indicates a wish to avoid even this step. When General Hertzog was in London in 1935 he raised this question. He was given a renewal of the old undertaking in the South Africa Act, but it was qualified by the observation that, as native ooinion seemed to be strongly opposed to transfer, the time was not rip* for action. Apparently, according to London comment, that is stilJ the official attitude, which means that General Hertzog has made no progress with his renewed negotiations. His tone of impatience shows that he is not likely to remain satisfied by the obviously temporising attitude of the British Government.,