Chapter LXXXVII: Act 8: Parliament 1. repeated in Act 99. Parliament 7 (13)

The early history of the Cape Colony, after it became a
dependency of the British Crown, "is a record of the struggles
of the settlers, both English and Dutch, against the despotic
system of government established by Lord Charles Somerset; of
Kaffir wars, in which the colonists were often hard put to it
to hold their own; and of the struggle for the liberty of the
Press, sustained with success by John Fairbairn, and Thomas
Pringle, the poet of South Africa, the Ovid of a self-chosen
exile. For a time the Dutch and English settlers lived in
peace and amity together, but the English efforts to alleviate
the condition of, and finally emancipate the slaves, severed
the two races. The Dutch settlers held the old Biblical
notions about slavery, and they resented fiercely the law of
1833 emancipating all slaves throughout the colony in 1834.
The Boers at once determined to 'trek,' to leave the colony
which was under the jurisdiction of the English law, and find
in the South African wilderness, where no human law prevailed,
food for their flocks, and the pastoral freedom of Jacob and
of Abraham. The Boers would live their own lives in their own
way. They had nothing in common with the Englishman, and they
wished for nothing in common. … They were a primitive people,
farming, hunting, reading the Bible, pious, sturdy, and
independent; and the colonial Government was by no means
willing to see them leaving the fields and farms that they had
colonised, in order to found fresh states outside the
boundaries of the newly acquired territory. But the Government
was powerless, it tried, and tried in vain, to prevent this
emigration. There was no law to prevent it. … So, with their
waggons, their horses, their cattle and sheep, their guns, and
their few household goods, the hardy Boers struck out into the
interior and to the north-east, in true patriarchal fashion
[the migration being known as the Great Trek], seeking their
promised land, and that 'desolate freedom of the wild ass'
which was dear to their hearts. They founded a colony at
Natal, fought and baptized the new colony in their own blood.
The Zulu chief, Dingaan, who sold them the territory, murdered
the Boer leader, Peter Retief, and his 79 followers as soon as
the deed was signed. This was the beginning of the Boer hatred
to the native races. The Boers fought with the Zulus
successfully enough, fought with the English who came upon
them less successfully. The Imperial Government decided that
it would not permit its subjects to establish any independent
Governments in any part of South Africa. In 1843, after no
slight struggle and bloodshed, the Dutch republic of Natal
ceased to be, and Natal became part of the British dominion.
Again the Boers, who were unwilling to remain under British
rule, 'trekked' northward; again a free Dutch state was
founded—the Orange Free State. Once again the English
Government persisted in regarding them as British subjects,
and as rebels if they refused to admit as much. Once again
there was strife and bloodshed, and in 1848 the Orange
settlement was placed under British authority, while the
leading Boers fled for their lives across the Vaal River, and,
obstinately independent, began to found the Transvaal
Republic. After six years, however, of British rule in the
Orange territory the Imperial Government decided to give it
back to the Boers, whose stubborn desire for self-government,
and unchanging dislike for foreign rule, made them practically
unmanageable as subjects. In April 1854 a convention was
entered into with the Boers of the Orange territory, by which
the Imperial Government guaranteed the future independence of
the Orange Free State. Across the Vaal River the Transvaal
Boers grew and flourished after their own fashion, fought the
natives, established their republic and their Volksraad. But
in 1877 the Transvaal republic, had been getting rather the
worst of it in some of these struggles, and certain of the
Transvaal Boers seem to have made suggestions to England that
she should take the Transvaal republic under her protection.
Sir Theophilus Shepstone was sent out to investigate the
situation. He seems to have entirely misunderstood the
condition of things, and to have taken the frightened desires
of a few Boers as the honest sentiments of the whole Boer
nation. In an evil hour he hoisted the English flag in the
Transvaal, and declared the little republic a portion of the
territory of the British Crown.
{2963}
As a matter of fact, the majority of the Boers were a fierce,
independent people, very jealous of their liberty, and without
the least desire to come under the rule, to escape which they
had wandered so far from the earliest settlements of their
race. … The Boers of the Transvaal sent deputation after
deputation to England to appeal, and appeal in vain, against
the annexation. Lord Carnarvon had set his whole heart upon a
scheme of South African confederation; his belief in the ease
with which this confederation might be accomplished was
carefully fostered by judiciously coloured official reports. …
Sir Bartle Frere, 'as a friend,' advised the Boers 'not to
believe one word' of any statements to the effect that the
English people would be willing to give up the Transvaal.
'Never believe,' he said, 'that the English people will do
anything of the kind.' 'When the chief civil and military
command of the eastern part of South Africa was given to Sir
Garnet Wolseley, Sir Garnet Wolseley was not less explicit in
his statements. … In spite of the announcements of Sir Bartle
Frere, Sir Garnet Wolseley, and Sir Owen Lanyon, the
disaffected Boers were not without more or less direct English
encouragement. The Boer deputations had found many friends in
England. … One of those who thus sympathised was Mr.
Gladstone. In his Midlothian speeches he denounced again and
again the Conservative policy which had led to the annexation
of the Transvaal. … While all the winds of the world were
carrying Mr. Gladstone's words to every corner of the earth,
it is not surprising that the Boers of the Transvaal … should
have caught at these encouraging sentences, and been cheered
by them, and animated by them to rise against the despotism
denounced by a former Prime Minister of England. … For some
time there seemed to be no reasonable chance of liberty, but
in the end of 1880 the Boers saw their opportunity. … There
were few troops in the Transvaal. The Boer hour had come. As
in most insurrections, the immediate cause of the rising was
slight enough. A Boer named Bezhuidenot was summoned by the
landdrost of Potchefstrom to pay a claim made by the Treasury
officials at Pretoria. Bezhuidenot resisted the claim, which
certainly appears to have been illegal. … The landdrost
attached a waggon of Bezhuidenot's, and announced that it
would be sold to meet the claim. On November 11 the waggon was
brought into the open square of Potchefstrom, and the sheriff
was about to begin the sale, when a number of armed Boers
pulled him off and carried the waggon away in triumph. They
were unopposed, as there was no force in the town to resist
them. The incident, trifling in itself, of Bezhuidenot's cart,
was the match which fired the long-prepared train. Sir Owen
Lanyon sent some troops to Potchefstrom; a wholly unsuccessful
attempt was made to arrest the ringleaders of the Bezhuidenot
affair; it was obvious that a collision was close at hand. …
On Monday, December 13, 1880, almost exactly a month after the
affair of Bezhuidenot's waggon, a mass meeting of Boers at
Heidelberg proclaimed the Transvaal once again a republic,
established a triumvirate Government, and prepared to defend
their republic in arms. … The news of the insurrections
aroused the Cape Government to a sense of the seriousness of
the situation. Movements of British troops were at once made
to put the insurgents down with all speed. It is still an
unsettled point on which side the first shot was fired. There
were some shots exchanged at Potchefstrom on December 15. …
Previously to this the 94th regiment had marched from
Leydenberg to reinforce Pretoria on December 5, and had
reached Middleburgh about a week later. On the way came
rumours of the Boer rising. … Colonel Anstruther seems to have
felt convinced that the force he had with him was quite strong
enough to render a good account of any rebels who might
attempt to intercept its march. The whole strength of his
force, however, officers included, did not amount to quite 250
men. The troops crossed the Oliphants River, left it two days'
march behind them, and on the morning of the 20th were
marching quietly along with their long line of waggons and
their band playing 'God save the Queen' under the bright glare
of the sun. Suddenly, on the rising ground near the Bronkhorst
Spruit a body of armed Boers appeared. A man galloped out from
among them—Paul de Beer—with a flag of truce. Colonel
Anstruther rode out to meet him, and received a sealed
despatch warning the colonel that the British advance would be
considered as a declaration of war. Colonel Anstruther replied
simply that he was ordered to go to Pretoria, and that he
should do so. Each man galloped back to his own force, and
firing began. In ten minutes the fight, if fight it can be
called, was over. The Boers were unrivalled sharp-shooters,
had marked out every officer; every shot was aimed, and every
shot told. The Boers were well covered by trees on rising
ground; the English were beneath them, had no cover at all,
and were completely at their mercy. In ten minutes all the
officers had fallen, some forty men were killed, and nearly
double the number wounded. Colonel Anstruther, who was himself
badly wounded, saw that he must either surrender or have all
his men shot down, and he surrendered. … Colonel Anstruther,
who afterwards died of his wounds, bore high tribute in his
despatch to the kindness and humanity of the Boers when once
the fight was done. … Sir George Colley struggled bravely for
a while to make head against the Boers. At Lang's Nek and
Ingago he did his best, and the men under him fought
gallantly, but the superior positions and marksmanship of the
Boers gave them the advantage in both fights. Under their
murderous fire the officers and men fell helplessly. Officer
after officer of a regiment would be shot down by the unerring
aim of the Boers while trying to rally his men, while the
British fire did comparatively slight damage, and the troops
seldom came to sufficiently close quarters to use the bayonet.
But the most fatal battle of the campaign was yet to come. Sir
Evelyn Wood had arrived at the Cape with reinforcements, had
met Sir George Colley, and had gone to Pietermaritzburg to
await the coming of further reinforcements. On Saturday night,
February 26, Sir George Colley with a small force moved out of
the camp at Mount Prospect, and occupied the Majuba Hill,
which overlooked the Boer camps on the flat beyond Lang's Nek.
Early next morning the Boers attacked the hill; there was some
desultory firing for a while, under cover of which three Boer
storming parties ascended the hill almost unseen.
{2964}
The British were outflanked and surrounded, a deadly fire was
poured in upon them from all sides. The slaughter was
excessive. As usual the officers were soon shot down. Sir
George Colley, who was directing the movements as coolly as if
at review, was killed just as he was giving orders to cease
firing. The British broke and fled, fired upon as they fled by
the sharpshooters. Some escaped; a large number were taken
prisoners. So disastrous a defeat had seldom fallen upon
British arms. The recent memory of Maiwand was quite
obliterated. That was the last episode of the war. General
Wood agreed to a temporary armistice. There had been
negotiations going on between the Boers and the British before
the Majuba Hill defeat, which need never have occurred if
there had not been a delay in a reply of Kruger's to a letter
of Sir George Colley's. The negotiations were now resumed, and
concluded in the establishment of peace, on what may be called
a Boer basis. The republic of the Transvaal was to be
re-established, with a British protectorate and a British
Resident indeed, but practically granting the Boers the
self-government for which they took up arms."

_J. H. McCarthy,
England under Gladstone,
chapter 5. _

ALSO IN:
_J. Nixon,
Complete Story of the Transvaal._

_T. F. Carter,
Narrative of the Boer War._

SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1811-1868.
The Kafir wars.
British absorption of Kafraria.

"In 1811 the first Kafir war was brought on by the
depredations of those warlike natives on the Boers of the
eastern frontier; a war to the knife ensued, the Kafirs were
driven to the other side of the Great Fish River, and military
posts were formed along the border. A second war, however,
broke out in 1818, when the Kafirs invading the colony drove
the farmers completely out of the country west of the Great
Fish River, penetrating as far as Uitenhage. But the Kafirs
could not stand against the guns of the colonists, and the
second war terminated in the advance of an overwhelming force
into Kafirland, and the annexation of a large slice of
territory, east of the Great Fish River, to the colony. … For
a third time, in 1835, a horde of about 10,000 fighting men of
the Kafirs spread fire and slaughter and pillage over the
eastern districts, a war which led, as the previous ones had
done, to a more extended invasion of Kafraria by the British
troops, and the subjugation of the tribes east of the Kei
river. … A fourth great Kafir war in 1846, provoked by the
daring raids of these hostile tribes and their bold invasions
of the colony was also followed up by farther encroachments on
Kafir territory, and in 1847 a proclamation was issued
extending the frontier to the Orange river on the north and to
the Keiskamma river in the east, British sovereignty being
then also declared over the territory extending from the
latter river eastward to the Kei, though this space was at
first reserved for occupation by the Kafirs and named British
Kafraria. But peace was restored only for a brief time; in
1857 a fresh Kafir rebellion had broken out, and for two years
subsequently a sort of guerilla warfare was maintained along
the eastern frontier, involving great losses of life and
destruction of property. In 1863 this last Kafir war was
brought to a conclusion, and British Kafraria was placed under
the rule of European functionaries and incorporated with the
colony. In 1868 the Basutos [or Eastern Bechuanas], who occupy
the territory about the head of the Orange river, between its
tributary the Caledon and the summits of the Drakenberg range,
and who had lived under a semi-protectorate of the British
since 1848, were proclaimed British subjects. … Subsequently
large portions of formerly independent Kafraria between the
Kei river and the southern border of Natal have passed under
the government of the Cape."

_Hellwald-Johnston,
Africa
(Stanford's Compendium),
chapter 23._

SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1867-1871.
Discovery of Diamonds.
Annexation of Griqualand west to Cape Colony.

See GRIQUAS.

SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1877-1879.
The Zulu War.

"At this time [1877] besides the three English Colonies of
Cape Town, Natal, and the lately formed Griqualand, there were
two independent Dutch Republics,—the Orange Free State, and
the Transvaal. Much of the white population even of the
English Provinces was Dutch, and a still larger proportion
consisted of reclaimed or half-reclaimed natives. Thus … there
lay behind all disputes the question which invariably attends
frontier settlements—the treatment of the native population.
This difficulty had become prominent in the year 1873 and
1874, when the fear of treachery on the part of a chief of the
name of Langalibalele located in Natal had driven the European
inhabitants to unjustifiable violence. The tribe over which
the chief had ruled had been scattered and driven from its
territory, the chief himself brought to trial, and on most
insufficient evidence sentenced to transportation. It was the
persuasion that he was intriguing with external tribes which
had excited the unreasoning fear of the colonists. For beyond
the frontier there lay the Zulus, a remarkable nation,
organised entirely upon a military system, and forming a great
standing army under the despotic rule of their King Cetchwayo.
Along the frontier of Natal the English preserved friendly
relations with this threatening chief. But the Dutch Boers of
the Transvaal, harsh and arbitrary in their treatment of
natives, had already involved themselves in a war with a
neighbouring potentate of the name of Secocoeni, and had got
into disputes with Cetchwayo, which threatened to bring upon
the European Colonies an indiscriminate assault." Lord
Carnarvon thought it practicable to cure the troubles in South
Africa by a confederation of the colonies. "The difficulty of
the situation was so obvious to the Colonial Minister that he
had chosen as High Commissioner a man whose experience and
energy he could thoroughly trust. Unfortunately in Sir Bartle
Frere he had selected a man not only of great ability, but one
who carried self-reliance and imperialist views to an extreme.
… The danger caused by the reckless conduct of the Boers upon
the frontier, and their proved incapacity to resist their
native enemies, had made it a matter of the last importance
that they should join the proposed Confederation, and thus be
at once restrained and assisted by the central power. Sir
Theophilus Shepstone had been charged with the duty of
bringing the Transvaal Republic to consent to an arrangement
of this sort. … Unable to persuade the Boers to accept his
suggestions for an amicable arrangement, he proceeded, in
virtue of powers intrusted to him, to declare the Republic
annexed, and to take over the government. This high-handed act
brought with it, as some of its critics in the House of
Commons had prophesied, disastrous difficulties.
{2965}
Not only were the Boers themselves almost as a matter of
course disaffected, but they handed over to the Imperial
Government all their difficulties and hostilities. They were
involved in disputes with both their barbarous neighbours. …
In 1875 they had made demands upon Cetchwayo, the most
important of which was a rectification of frontier largely in
their own favour. … Commissioners were appointed in 1878 to
inquire into the rights of the case. … The Commissioners
arrived at a unanimous decision against the Dutch claims. …
But before the Treaty could be carried out it required
ratification from the High Commissioner, and it came back from
his hands clogged with formidable conditions. … While … he
accepted the boundary report, he determined to make it an
opportunity for the destruction of Cetchwayo's power. In
December a Special Commission was despatched to meet the Zulu
Envoys to explain the award, but at the same time to demand
corresponding guarantees from the King. When these were
unfolded they appeared to be the abolition of his military
system and the substitution of a system of tribal regiments
approved by the British Government, the acceptance of a
British Resident by whose advice he was to act, the protection
of missionaries, and the payment of certain fines for
irregularities committed by his subjects. These claims were
thrown into the form of an ultimatum, and Cetchwayo was given
thirty days to decide. … It was to be submission or war. It
proved to be war. Sir Bartle Frere had already prepared for
this contingency; he had detained in South Africa the troops
which should have returned to England, and had applied to the
Home Government for more. … Lord Chelmsford was appointed to
the command of the troops upon the frontier, and on the 12th,
the very day on which the time allowed for the acceptance of
the ultimatum expired, the frontier was crossed. The invasion
was directed towards Ulundi, the Zulu capital. … The first
step across the frontier produced a terrible disaster. The
troops under the immediate command of Lord Chelmsford encamped
at Isandlana without any of the ordinary precautions, and in a
bad position. … In this unprotected situation Lord Chelmsford,
while himself advancing to reconnoitre, left two battalions of
the 24th with some native allies under Colonel Pulleine, who
were subsequently joined by a body of 3,000 natives and a few
Europeans under Colonel Durnford. The forces left in the camp
were suddenly assaulted by the Zulus in overwhelming numbers
and entirely destroyed [January 22, 1879]. It was only the
magnificent defence by Chard and Bromhead of the post and
hospital at Rorke's Drift which prevented the victorious
savages from pouring into Natal. Lord Chelmsford on returning
from his advance hurried from the fearful scene of slaughter
back to the frontier. For the moment all was panic; an
immediate irruption of the enemy was expected. But when it was
found that Colonel Wood to the west could hold his own though
only with much rough fighting, and that Colonel Pearson,
towards the mouth of the river, after a successful battle had
occupied and held Ekowe, confidence was re-established. But
the troops in Ekowe were cut off from all communication except
by means of heliographic signals, and the interest of the war
was for a while centred upon the beleaguered garrison. With
extreme caution, in spite of the clamorous criticism levelled
against him, Lord Chelmsford refused to move to its rescue
till fully reinforced. Towards the end of March however it was
known that the provisions were running low, and on the 29th an
army of 6,000 men again crossed the frontier. On this occasion
there was no lack of precaution. … As they approached the
fortress, they were assaulted at Gingilovo, their strong
formation proved efficient against the wild bravery of their
assailants, a complete victory was won, and the garrison at
Ekowe rescued. A day or two earlier an even more reckless
assault upon Colonel Wood's camp at Kambula was encountered
with the same success. But for the re-establishment of the
English prestige it was thought necessary to undertake a fresh
invasion of the country. … Several attempts at peace had been
made on the part of the Zulus. But their ambassadors were
never, in the opinion of the English generals, sufficiently
accredited to allow negotiations to be opened. Yet it would
appear that Cetchwayo was really desirous of peace, according
to his own account even the assault at Isandlana was an
accident, and the two last great battles were the result of
local efforts. At length in July properly authorised envoys
came to the camp. Terms of submission were dictated to them,
but as they were not at once accepted a final battle was
fought resulting completely in favour of the English, who then
occupied and burnt Ulundi, the Zulu capital. … Sir Garnet
Wolseley was … again sent out with full powers to effect a
settlement. His first business was to capture the King. When
this was done he proceeded to divide Zululand into thirteen
districts, each under a separate chief; the military system
was destroyed; the people were disarmed and no importation of
arms allowed; a Resident was to decide disputes in which
British subjects were involved. The reception of missionaries
against the will of the people was not however insisted on."

_J. F. Bright,
History of England,
period 4, pages 545-550._

ALSO IN:
_F. E. Colenso and E. Durnford,
History of the Zulu War._

_A. Wilmot,
History of the Zulu War._

_C. J. Norris-Newman,
In Zululand with the British._

_C. Vijn,
Cetswayo's Dutchman._

SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1885-1893.
British acquisition of Matabeleland or Zambesia.
Dominion of the British South Africa Company.
War with King Lobengula.

"The Boers, ever on the lookout for new lands into which to
trek, had long ago fixed their eyes on the country north of
the Limpopo, known generally as Matabeleland, ruled over by
Lobengula, the son of the chief of the Matabeles. … The
reports of Mauch, Baines, and others, of the rich gold mines
contained in this territory, were well known. … Other
travellers and sportsmen, Mohr, Oates, Selous, gave the most
favourable accounts not only of the gold of the country, but
of the suitability of a large portion of the high plateau
known as Mashonaland for European settlement and agricultural
operations. When Sir Charles Warren was in Bechuanaland in
1885, several of his officers made journeys to Matabeleland,
and their reports all tended to show the desirability of
taking possession of that country; indeed Sir Charles was
assured that Lobengula would welcome a British alliance as a
protection against the Boers, of whose designs he was
afraid. …
{2966}
As a result of Sir Charles Warren's mission to Bechuanaland,
and of the reports furnished by the agents he sent into
Matabeleland, the attention of adventurers and prospectors was
more and more drawn towards the latter country. The Portuguese
… had been electrified into activity by the events of the past
two years. That the attention of the British Government was
directed to Matabeleland even in 1887 is evident from a
protest in August of that year, on the part of Lord Salisbury,
against an official Portuguese map claiming a section of that
country as within the Portuguese sphere. Lord Salisbury then
clearly stated that no pretensions of Portugal to Matabeleland
could be recognised, and that the Zambesi should be regarded
as the natural northern limit of British South Africa. The
British Prime Minister reminded the Portuguese Government that
according to the Berlin Act no claim to territory in Central
Africa could be recognised that was not supported by effective
occupation. The Portuguese Government maintained (it must be
admitted with justice) that this applied only to the coast,
but Lord Salisbury stood firmly to his position. … Germans,
Boers, Portuguese, were all ready to lay their hands on the
country claimed by Lobengula. England stepped in and took it
out of their hands; and at the worst she can only be accused
of obeying the law of the universe, 'Might is Right.' By the
end of 1887 the attempts of the Transvaal Boers to obtain a
hold over Matabeleland had reached a crisis. It became evident
that no time was to be lost if England was to secure the
Zambesi as the northern limit of extension of her South
African possessions. Lobengula himself was harassed and
anxious as to the designs of the Boers on the one hand, and
the doings of the Portuguese on the north of his territory on
the other. In the Rev. J. Smith Moffat, Assistant Commissioner
in Bechuanaland, England had a trusty agent who had formerly
been a missionary for many years in Matabeleland, and had
great influence with Lobengula. Under the circumstances, it
does not seem to have been difficult for Mr. Moffat to
persuade the King to put an end to his troubles by placing
himself under the protection of Great Britain. On 21st March
1888, Sir Hercules Robinson, Governor of Cape Colony, and Her
Majesty's High Commissioner for South Africa, was able to
inform the Home Government that on the previous 11th February
Lobengula had appended his mark to a brief document which
secured to England supremacy in Matabeleland over all her
rivals. … The publication of the treaty was, as might be
expected, followed by reclamations both on the part of the
Transvaal and of Portugal. Before the British hold was firmly
established over the country attempts were made by large
parties of Boers to trek into Matabeleland. … Individual Boers
as well, it must be said, as individual Englishmen at the
kraal of Lobengula, attempted to poison the mind of the latter
against the British. But the King remained throughout faithful
to his engagements. Indeed, it was not Lobengula himself who
gave any cause for anxiety during the initial stage of the
English occupation. He is, no doubt, a powerful chief, but
even he is obliged to defer to the wishes of his 'indunas' and
his army. … Lobengula himself kept a firm hand over his
warriors, but even he was at times apprehensive that they
might burst beyond all control. Happily this trying initial
period passed without disaster. … No sooner was the treaty
signed than Lobengula was besieged for concessions of land,
the main object of which was to obtain the gold with which the
country was said to abound, especially in the east, in
Mashonaland." The principal competitors for what was looked
upon as the great prize were two syndicates of capitalists,
which finally became amalgamated, in 1889, under the skilful
diplomacy of Mr. Cecil J. Rhodes, forming the great British
South Africa Company, about which much has been heard in
recent years. "The principal field of the operations of the
British South Africa Company was defined in the charter to be
'the region of South Africa lying immediately to the north of
British Bechuanaland, and to the north and west of the South
African Republic, and to the west of the Portuguese
dominions.' The Company was also empowered to acquire any
further concessions, if approved of by 'Our Secretary of
State.' … The Company was empowered to act as the
representative of the Imperial Government, without, however,
obtaining any assistance from the Government to bear the
expense of the administration. … The capital of the Company
was a million sterling. It is not easy to define the relations
of the Chartered Company to the various other companies which
had mining interests in the country. In itself it was not a
consolidation of the interests of those companies. Its
functions were to administer the country and to work the
concessions on behalf of the Concessionaires, in return for
which it was to retain fifty per cent. of the profits. … When
the British South African Company was prepared to enter into
active occupation of the territories which they were
authorised to exploit, they had on the one hand the impis of
Lobengula eager to wash their spears in white blood; on the
south the Boers of the Transvaal, embittered at being
prevented from trekking to the north of the Limpopo, and on
the east and on the north-east the Portuguese trying to raise
a wall of claims and historical pretensions against the tide
of English energy. … An agreement was concluded between
England and Portugal in August 1890, by which the eastern
limits of the South Africa Company's claims were fixed, and
the course of the unknown Sabi River, from north to south, was
taken as a boundary. But this did not satisfy either Portugal
or the Company, and the treaty was never ratified. … A new
agreement [was] signed on the 11th June 1891, under which
Portugal can hardly be said to have fared so well as she would
have done under the one repudiated by the Cortes in the
previous year. The boundary between the British Company's
territories was drawn farther east than in the previous
treaty. The line starting from the Zambesi near Zumbo runs in
a general south-east direction to a point where the Mazoe
River is cut by the 33rd degree of east longitude. The
boundary then runs in a generally south direction to the
junction of the Lunde and the Sabi, where it strikes
south-west to the north-east corner of the South African
Republic, on the Limpopo. In tracing the frontier along the
slope of the plateau, the Portuguese sphere was not allowed to
come farther west than 32° 30' East of Greenwich, nor the
British sphere east of 33° East. A slight deflection westwards
was made so as to include Massi Kessi in the Portuguese
sphere. … According to the terms of the arrangement, the
navigation of the Zambesi and the Shiré was declared free to
all nations."

_J S. Keltie,
The Partition of Africa,
chapter 18._

{2967}

By the spring of 1893 the British South Africa Company had
fairly laid hands upon its great dominion of Zambesia.
Matabele was swarming with searchers for gold; a railroad from
the port of Beira, through Portuguese territory, was in
progress: a town at Fort Salisbury was rising. Lobengula, the
Matabele king, repented speedily of his treaty and repudiated
the construction put on it by the English. Quarrels arose over
the Mashonas, whom the Matabeles held in slavery and whom the
new lords of the country protected. Both parties showed
impatience for war, and it was not long in breaking out. The
first shots were exchanged early in October; before the end of
the year the British were complete masters of the country, and
Lobengula had fled from his lost kingdom, to die, it is said,
during the flight. There were two pitched battles, in which
the natives suffered terribly. They obtained revenge in one
instance, only, by cutting off a party of thirty men, not one
of whom survived.

----------SOUTH AFRICA: End--------

SOUTH AFRICA COMPANY, The British.

See AFRICA: A. D. 1884-1891,
and SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1885-1893.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA.

See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1800-1840.

----------SOUTH CAROLINA: Start--------

SOUTH CAROLINA: The aboriginal in:habitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
CHEROKEES, MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY,
SHAWANESE, TIMUQUANAN FAMILY.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1520.
The coast explored by Vasquez de Ayllon and called Chicora.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1519-1525.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1562-1563.
The short-lived Huguenot colony on Broad River.

See FLORIDA: A. D. 1562-1563.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1629.
Embraced in the Carolina grant to Sir Robert Heath.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1629.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.
The grant to Monk, Clarendon, Shaftesbury, and others.
The first settlement.

See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1669-1693.
Locke's Constitution and its failure.

See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1669-1693.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1670-1696.
The founding of Charleston.
The growth of the Colony.

The expedition of Captain Sayle in 1670 (see NORTH CAROLINA:
A. D. 1663-1670) resulted in a settlement, made in 1671, which
is historically referred to as that of "Old Charleston." This
continued to be for some years the capital of the southern
colony: "but, as the commerce of the colony increased, the
disadvantages of the position were discovered. It could not be
approached by large vessels at low water. In 1680, by a formal
command of the proprietors, a second removal took place, the
government literally following the people, who had in numbers
anticipated the legislative action: and the seat of government
was transferred to a neck of land called Oyster Point,
admirably conceived for the purposes of commerce, at the
confluence of two spacious and deep rivers, the Kiawah and
Etiwan, which, in compliment to Lord Shaftesbury, had already
been called after him, Ashley and Cooper. Here the foundation
was laid of the present city of Charleston. In that year 30
houses were built, though this number could have met the wants
of but a small portion of the colony. The heads of families at
the Port Royal settlement alone, whose names are preserved to
us, are 48 in number: those brought from Clarendon by Yeamans
could not have been less numerous: and the additions which
they must have had from the mother-country, during the seven
or eight years of their stay at the Ashley river settlement,
were likely to have been very considerable. Roundheads and
cavaliers alike sought refuge in Carolina, which, for a long
time, remained a pet province of the proprietors. Liberty of
conscience, which the charter professed to guaranty,
encouraged emigration. The hopes of avarice, the rigor of
creditors, the fear of punishment and persecution, were equal
incentives to the settlement of this favored but foreign
region. … In 1674, when Nova Belgia, now New York, was
conquered by the English, a number of the Dutch from that
place sought refuge in Carolina. … Two vessels filled with
foreign, perhaps French, Protestants, were transported to
Carolina, at the expense of Charles II., in 1679; and the
revocation of the edict of Nantz, a few years afterwards, …
contributed still more largely to the infant settlement, and
provided Carolina with some of the best portions of her
growing population. … In 1696, a colony of Congregationalists,
from Dorchester in Massachusetts, ascended the Ashley river
nearly to its head, and there founded a town, to which they
gave the name of that which they had left. Dorchester became a
town of some importance. … It is now deserted; the habitations
and inhabitants have alike vanished; but the reverend spire,
rising through the forest trees which surround it, still
attests (1840) the place of their worship, and where so many
of them yet repose. Various other countries and causes
contributed to the growth and population of the new
settlement."

_W. G. Simms,
History of South Carolina,
book 2, chapter 1._

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1680.
Spanish attack from Florida.
Indian and Negro Slavery.

"About 1680 a few leading Scotch Presbyterians planned the
establishment of a refuge for their persecuted brethren within
the bounds of Carolina. The plan shrunk to smaller dimensions
than those originally contemplated. Finally Lord Cardross,
with a colony of ten Scotch families, settled on the vacant
territory of Port Royal. The fate of the settlement
foreshadowed the miseries of Darien. It suffered alike from
the climate and from the jealousy of the English settlers. …
For nearly ten years the dread of a Spanish attack had hung
over South Carolina. … In 1680 the threatened storm broke upon
the colony. Three galleys landed an invading force at Edisto,
where the Governor and secretary had private houses, plundered
them of money, plate, and slaves, and killed the Governor's
brother-in-law. They then fell upon the Scotch settlement,
which had now shrunk to 25 men, and swept it clean out of
existence. The colonists did not sit down tamely under their
injuries. They raised a force of 400 men and were on the point
of making a retaliatory attack when they were checked by an
order from the Proprietors. …
{2968}
The Proprietors may have felt … that, although the immediate
attack was unprovoked, the colonists were not wholly blameless
in the matter. The Spaniards had suffered from the ravages of
pirates who were believed to be befriended by the inhabitants
of Charlestown. In another way too the settlers had placed a
weapon in the hands of their enemies. The Spaniards were but
little to be dreaded, unless strengthened by an Indian
alliance. … But from the first settlement of Carolina the
colony was tainted with a vice which imperilled its relations
with the Indians. Barbadoes … had a large share in the
original settlement of Carolina. In that colony negro slavery
was already firmly established as the one system of industry.
At the time when Yeamans and his followers set sail for the
shores of Carolina, Barbadoes had probably two negroes for
everyone white inhabitant. The soil and climate of the new
territory did everything to confirm the practice of slavery,
and South Carolina was from the outset what she ever after
remained, the peculiar home of that evil usage. To the West
India planter every man of dark colour seemed a natural and
proper object of traffic. The settler in Carolina soon learnt
the same view. In Virginia and Maryland there are but few
traces of any attempt to enslave the Indians. In Carolina …
the Indian was kidnapped and sold, sometimes to work on what
had once been his own soil, sometimes to end his days as an
exile and bondsman in the West Indies. As late as 1708 the
native population furnished a quarter of the whole body of
slaves. It would be unfair to attribute all the hostilities
between the Indians and the colonists to this one source, but
it is clear that it was an import:mt factor. From their very
earliest days the settlers were involved in troubles with
their savage neighbours."

_J. A. Doyle,
The English in America: Virginia, Maryland,
and the Carolinas,
chapter 12._

"Of the original thirteen states, South Carolina alone was
from its origin essentially a planting state with slave labor.
… The proprietaries tempted emigrants by the offer of land at
an easy quit-rent, and 150 acres were granted for every able
man-servant. 'In that they meant negroes as well as
Christians.' … It became the great object of the emigrant 'to
buy negro slaves, without which,' adds Wilson, 'a planter can
never do any great matter'; and the negro race was multiplied
so rapidly by importations that, in a few years, we are told,
the blacks in the low country were to the whites in the
proportion of 22 to 12."

_G. Bancroft,
History of the United States
(Author's last revision),
part 2, chapter 8 (volume 1)._

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1688-1696.
Beginning of distinctions between the two Carolinas,
North and South.

See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1688-1729.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1701-1706.
Prosperity of the colony.
Attack on St. Augustine.
French attack on Charleston.

"At the opening of the new century, we must cease to look upon
South Carolina as the home of indigent emigrants, struggling
for subsistence. While numerous slaves cultivated the
extensive plantations, their owners, educated gentlemen, and
here and there of noble families in England, had abundant
leisure for social intercourse, living as they did in
proximity to each other, and in easy access to Charles Town,
where the Governor resided, the courts and legislature
convened, and the public offices were kept. … Hospitality,
refinement, and literary culture distinguished the higher
class of gentlemen." But party strife at this period raged
bitterly, growing mainly out of an attempt to establish the
Church of England in the colony. Governor Moore, who had
gained power on this issue, sought to strengthen his position
by an attack on St. Augustine. "The assembly joined in the
scheme. They requested him to go as commander, instead of
Colonel Daniel, whom he nominated. They voted £2,000; and
thought ten vessels and 350 men, with Indian allies, would be
a sufficient force. … Moore with about 400 men sets sail, and
Daniel with 100 Carolina troops and about 500 Yemassee Indians
march by land. But the inhabitants of St. Augustine had heard
of their coming, and had sent to Havana for reinforcements.
Retreating to their castle, they abandoned their town to
Colonel Daniel, who pillaged it before Moore's fleet arrived.
Governor Moore and Colonel Daniel united their forces and laid
siege to the castle; but they lacked the necessary artillery
for its reduction, and were compelled to send to Jamaica for
it." Before the artillery arrived, "two Spanish ships appeared
off St. Augustine. Moore instantly burned the town and all his
own ships and hastened back by land. … The expense entailed on
the colony was £6,000. When this attack on St. Augustine was
planned, it must have been anticipated in the colony that war
would be declared against Spain and France." Four years later,
the War of the Spanish Succession being then in progress, a
French fleet appeared (August, 1706) in the harbor of
Charleston and demanded the surrender of the town. Although
yellow fever was raging at the time, the governor, Sir
Nathaniel Johnson, organized so effective a resistance that
the invaders were driven off with considerable loss.

_W. J. Rivers,
The Carolinas (Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 5, chapter 5)._

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1740.
War with the Spaniards of Florida.

See GEORGIA: A. D. 1738-1743.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1759-1761.
The Cherokee War.

"The Cherokees, who had accompanied Forbes in his expedition
against Fort Du Quesne [see CANADA: A. D. 1758], returning
home along the mountains, had involved themselves in quarrels
with the back settlers of Virginia and the Carolinas, in which
several, both Indians and white men, had been killed. Some
chiefs, who had proceeded to Charleston to arrange this
dispute, were received by Governor Littleton in very haughty
style, and he presently marched into the Cherokee country at
the head of 1,500 men, contributed by Virginia and the
Carolinas, demanding the surrender of the murderers of the
English. He was soon glad, however, of any apology for
retiring. His troops proved very insubordinate; the small-pox
broke out among them; and, having accepted 22 Indian hostages
as security for peace and the future delivery of the
murderers, he broke up his camp, and fell back in haste and
confusion. … No sooner was Littleton's army gone, than the
Cherokees attempted to entrap into their power the commander
of [Fort Prince George, at the head of the Savannah], and,
apprehensive of some plan for the rescue of the hostages, he
gave orders to put them in irons. They resisted; and a soldier
having been wounded in the struggle, his infuriated companions
fell upon the prisoners and put them all to death.
{2969}
Indignant at this outrage, the Cherokees beleaguered the fort,
and sent out war parties in every direction to attack the
frontiers. The Assembly of South Carolina, in great alarm,
voted 1,000 men, and offered a premium of £25 for every Indian
scalp. North Carolina offered a similar premium, and
authorized, in addition, the holding of Indian captives as
slaves. An express, asking assistance, was sent to General
Amherst, who detached 1,200 men, under Colonel Montgomery,
chiefly Scotch Highlanders, lately stationed on the western
frontier, with orders to make a dash at the Cherokees, but to
return in season for the next campaign against Canada. …
Joining his forces with the provincial levies, Montgomery
entered the Cherokee country, raised the blockade of Fort
Prince George, and ravaged the neighboring district. Marching
then upon Etchoe, the chief village of the Middle Cherokees,
within five miles of that place he encountered [June, 1760] a
large body of Indians, strongly posted in a difficult defile,
from which they were only driven after a very severe struggle;
or, according to other accounts, "Montgomery was himself
repulsed. At all events, he retired to Charleston, and, in
obedience to his orders, prepared to embark for service at the
north. When this determination became known, the province was
thrown into the utmost consternation. The Assembly declared
themselves unable to raise men to protect the frontiers; and a
detachment of 400 regulars was presently conceded" to the
solicitations of lieutenant governor Bull, to whom the
administration of South Carolina had lately been resigned.
Before the year closed, the conquest of the French dominions
in America east of the Mississippi had been practically
finished and the French and Indian War at the north was
closed. But, "while the northern colonies exulted in safety,
the Cherokee war still kept the frontiers of Carolina in
alarm. Left to themselves by the withdrawal of Montgomery, the
Upper Cherokees had beleaguered Fort Loudon. After living for
some time on horse-flesh, the garrison, under a promise of
safe-conduct to the settlements, had been induced to
surrender. But this promise was broken; attacked on the way, a
part were killed, and the rest detained as prisoners; after
which, the Indians directed all their fury against the
frontiers. On a new application presently made to Amherst for
assistance, the Highland regiment, now commanded by Grant, was
ordered back to Carolina. New levies were also made in the
province, and Grant presently marched into the Cherokee
country [June, 1761] with 2,600 men. In a second battle, near
the same spot with the fight of the previous year, the Indians
were driven back with loss. … The Indians took refuge in the
defiles of the mountains, and, subdued and humbled, sued for
peace. As the condition on which alone it would be granted,
they were required to deliver up four warriors to be shot at
the head of the army, or to furnish four green Indian scalps
within twenty days. A personal application to Governor Bull,
by an old chief long known for his attachment to the English,
procured a relinquishment of this brutal demand, and peace was
presently made."

_R. Hildreth,
History of the United States,
chapter 27 (volume 2). _

ALSO IN:
_D. Ramsay,
History of South Carolina,
volume 1, chapter 5, section 2. _

_S. G. Drake,
Aboriginal Races of North America,
book 4, chapter 4._

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1760-1766.
The question of taxation by Parliament.
The Stamp Act.
The first Continental Congress.
The repeal of the Stamp Act and the Declaratory Act.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1760-1775; 1763-1764; 1765; and 1766.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1766-1774.
Opening events of the Revolution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1766-1767, to 1774;
and BOSTON: 1768, to 1773.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1775.
The beginning of the War of the American Revolution.
Lexington.
Concord.
Action taken on the news.
Ticonderoga.
The siege of Boston.
Bunker Hill.
The Second Continental Congress.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775.

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1775.
Rapid progress of Revolution.
Flight of the Royal Governor.

In January, 1775, a provincial convention for South Carolina
was called together at Charleston, under the presidency of
Charles Pinckney. It appointed delegates to the second
Continental Congress, and took measures to enforce the
non-importation agreements in which the colony had joined. At
a second session, in June, this convention or Provincial
Congress of South Carolina "appointed a Committee of Safety,
issued $600,000, of paper money, and voted to raise two
regiments, of which Gadsden and Moultrie were chosen colonels.
Lieutenant-governor Bull was utterly powerless to prevent or
interrupt these proceedings. While the Convention was still in
session, Lord William Campbell, who had acquired by marriage
large possessions in the province, arrived at Charleston with
a commission as governor. Received with courtesy, he presently
summoned an Assembly; but that body declined to proceed to
business, and soon adjourned on its own authority. The
Committee of Safety pursued with energy measures for putting
the province in a state of defense. A good deal of resistance
was made to the Association [for commercial non-intercourse],
especially in the back counties. Persuasion failing, force was
used. … A vessel was fitted out by the Committee of Safety,
which seized an English powder ship off St. Augustine and
brought her into Charleston. Moultrie was presently sent to
take possession of the fort in Charleston harbor. No
resistance was made. The small garrison, in expectation of the
visit, had already [September] retired on board the ships of
war in the harbor. Lord Campbell, the governor, accused of
secret negotiations with the Cherokees and the disaffected in
the back counties, was soon obliged to seek the same shelter.
A regiment of artillery was voted; and measures were taken for
fortifying the harbor, from which the British ships were soon
expelled."

_R. Hildreth,
History of the United States,
chapters 30-31 (volume 3)._

ALSO IN:
_D. Ramsay,
History of South Carolina,
volume 1, chapter 7, section 1._

SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1776 (February-April).
Allegiance to King George renounced, independence
assumed, and a state constitution adopted.

"On the 8th of February 1776, the convention of South
Carolina, by Drayton their president, presented their thanks
to John Rutledge and Henry Middleton for their services in the
American congress, which had made its appeal to the King of
kings, established a navy, treasury, and general post-office,
exercised control over commerce, and granted to colonies
permission to create civil institutions, independent of the
regal authority.
{2970}
The next day arrived Gadsden, the highest officer in the army
of the province, and he in like manner received the welcome of
public gratitude. … When, on the 10th, the report on reforming
the provincial government was considered and many hesitated,
Gadsden spoke out for the absolute independence of America.
The majority had thus far refused to contemplate the end
toward which they were irresistibly impelled. … But the
criminal laws could not be enforced for want of officers;
public and private affairs were running into confusion; the
imminent danger of invasion was proved by intercepted letters,
so that necessity compelled the adoption of some adequate
system of rule. While a committee of eleven was preparing the
organic law, Gadsden, on the 13th, began to act as senior
officer of the army. Companies of militia were called down to
Charleston, and the military forces augmented by two regiments
of riflemen. In the early part of the year Sullivan's Island
was a wilderness, thickly covered with myrtle, live-oak, and
palmettos; there, on the 2d of March, William Moultrie was
ordered to complete a fort large enough to hold 1,000 men.
Within five days after the convention received the act of
parliament of the preceding December which authorized the
capture of American vessels and property, they gave up the
hope of reconciliation; and, on the 26th of March 1776,
asserting 'the good of the people to be the origin and end of
all government,' and enumerating the unwarrantable acts of the
British parliament, the implacability of the king, and the
violence of his officers, they established a constitution for
South Carolina. … On the 27th, John Rutledge was chosen
president, Henry Laurens vice-president, and William Henry
Drayton chief justice. … On the 23d of April the court was
opened at Charleston, and the chief justice after an elaborate
exposition charged the grand jury in these words: 'The law of
the land authorizes me to declare, and it is my duty to
declare the law, that George III., king of Great Britain, has
abdicated the government, that he has no authority over us,
and we owe no obedience to him.'"

_G. Bancroft,
History of the United States (Author's last revision),
epoch 3, chapter 25 (volume 4)._

ALSO IN:
_W. G. Simms,
History of South Carolina,
book 4, chapter 5._

See, also,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776-1779.