creation of this enormous reservoir promises to make the Nile valey one of the richest cotton-producing regions
in the world.
The "Cape to Cairo" railway, which is more than half finished, is another British undertaking of immense
importance. (See map opposite.) When ready for traffic, through its whole length of nearly six thousand miles,
besides its branch lines, it wil open al Eastern Africa, from the Cape of Good Hope to the Mediterranean, to the
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
274/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
spread of commerce and civilization.
623. The Boers; the Boer War, 1899; Death of Queen Victoria (1901).
The history of the British in South Africa has been even more tragic than their progress in Egypt (S622).
In the middle of the seventeenth century (1652) the Dutch took possession of Cape Colony. (See map
opposite.) Many Boers, or Dutch farmers, and cattle raisers emigrated to that far distant land. There they were
joined by Huguenots, or French Protestants, who had been driven out of France. Al of them became
slaveholders. Early in the nineteenth century (1814) England purchased the Cape from Holand. Twenty years
later the English Parliament bought al the negroes held by the Boers and set them free.
Eight thousand Boers, disgusted with the loss of their slaves and with the smal price they had received for them,
left the Cape (1836) and pushed far northward into the wilderness. Crossing the Orange River, they founded the
"Orange Free State." Another party of Boers, going stil further north, crossed the Vaal River (a tributary of the Orange) and set up the Transvaal, or "South African Republic," on what was practicaly a slaveholding
foundation. Later (1852), England, by a treaty known as the Sand River Convention, virtualy recognized the
independence of the settlers in the Transvaal, and two years afterwards made a stil more explicit recognition of
the independence of the Orange Free State.
The Zulus and other fierce native tribes bordering on the Transvaal hated the Boers and threatened to "eat them
up." Later (1877), England thought it for her interest, and for that of the Boers as wel, to annex the Transvaal.
The English Governor did not grant the Boers the measure of political liberty which he had promised; this led to a
revolt, and a smal body of English soldiers was beaten at Majuba Hil (1881).
Mr. Gladstone, the Liberal Prime Minister, did not think that the conquest of the Transvaal, supposing it to be
justifiable, would pay for its cost, and he accordingly made a treaty with the people of that country (1881). Lord
Beaconsfield thought this policy a serious mistake, and that it would lead to trouble later on. He said, "We have failed to whip the boy, and we shal have to fight the man." The Gladstone Treaty acknowledged the right of the
Boers to govern themselves, but subject to English control. Three years later (1884) that treaty was modified.
The Boers declared that the English then gave up al control over them, except with regard to the power to make
treaties which might conflict with the interests of Great Britain. But this statement the English Government
emphaticaly denied.[1]
[1] The preamble of the Convention or agreement made between England and the Boers in 1881 at Pretoria, the
capital of the Transvaal, secured to the Boers "complete self-government, subject to the suzerainty of her
Majesty," Queen Victoria. In the Convention of 1884, made at London, the word "suzerainty" was dropped; but Mr. Chamberlain, Colonial Secretary of Great Britain, contended that it was implied or understood. This
interpretation of the agreement President Kruger of the South African or Boer Republic absolutely rejected.
The discovery of diamond fields in Cape Colony (1867) and of the richest gold mines in the world (1884) in the
Transvaal stimulated a great emigration of English to South Africa. In a few years the "Outlanders"—as the Boers caled al foreigners—outnumbered the Boers themselves. The "Outlanders," who worked the gold mines and
paid nearly al the taxes, complained that the laws made by the Boers were unjust and oppressive. They
demanded the right to vote. The Boers, on the other hand, refused to give them that right, except under arduous
restrictions, lest the foreigners should get the upper hand in the Transvaal Republic, and then manage it to suit
themselves.
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
275/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
Things went on from bad to worse. At length (1895) a prominent Englishman of Cape Colony, Dr. Jameson,
armed a smal body of "Outlanders," who undertook to get by force what they could not get by persuasion. The
Boers captured the Revolutionists and compeled some of the leaders to pay, in al, about a milion dolars in
fines. Dr. Jameson was sent to England and imprisoned for a short time. A committee appointed by Parliament
investigated the invasion of the Transvaal and charged Cecil J. Rhodes, then Prime Minister of Cape Colony,
with having helped on the raid. From this time the feeling of hatred between the Boers and the "Outlanders" grew more and more intense. Lord Salisbury, the Conservative Prime Minister, believed, with his party, that the time
had come for decisive action on the part of the Government. The fires so long smoldered now burst into flame,
and England resolved to fight to maintain her authority in the Transvaal.
War began in the autumn of 1899, and the Orange Free State united with the Transvaal against Great Britain.
(See map facing p. 428.) The Boers took up arms for independence. The English forces under Lord Roberts
began fighting, first in behalf of the "Outlanders," next to keep the British Empire together, and, finaly, "to extend English law, liberty, and civilization."
Mr. Chamberlain, who was in Lord Salisbury's Cabinet (S534), agreed with his chief that the sword must settle
the question, but he said that the contest in South Africa would be "a long war, a bitter war, and a costly war."
Events proved the truth of part of his prediction. The contest was certainly "bitter," for it carried sorrow and death into many thousand homes. It was "costly," too, for the total expense to England amounted to nearly
200,000,000 pounds.
England finaly overthrew and formaly annexed (1901) the two Boer republics, aggregating over one hundred
and sixty-seven thousand square miles. But to accomplish that work she was forced to send two hundred and
fifty thousand men to South Africa,—the largest army she ever put into a field in the whole course of her history.
The great majority of the English people believed that the war was inevitable. But there was an active minority
who insisted that it was realy undertaken in behalf of the South African mine owners. They did not hesitate to
condemn the "Jingo" policy[1] of the Government as disastrous to the best interests of the country. In the midst of the discussion Queen Victoria died (January 22, 1901). The Prince of Wales succeeded to the crown under
the title of King Edward VII.
[1] Lord Beaconsfield, the Conservative Prime Minister (1874-1880),
made several petty wars in South Africa and in Afghanistan. A popular
music-hal song glorified his work, declaring:
"We don't want to fight, but by Jingo, if we do,
We've got the ships, we've got the men,
We've got the money, too."
624. Summary.
Queen Victoria's reign of sixty-three years—the longest in English history—was remarkable in many ways.
The chief political events were:
1. The establishment of the practical supremacy of the House of
Commons, shown by the fact that the Sovereign was now obliged to
give up the power of removing the Prime Minister or members of his
Cabinet without the consent of the House, or of retaining them
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
276/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
contrary to its desire.
2. The broadening of the basis of suffrage and the extension of the
principle of local self-government.
3. The abolition of the requirement of property qualification for
Parliamentary candidates; the admission of Jews to Parliament; and
the overthrow of the Spoils System.
4. The repeals of the Corn Laws; the adoption of the Free-Trade
policy; and the Emancipation of Labor.
5. The Smal Agricultural Holdings Act; the Irish Land Acts; the
abolition of Church rates; and the disestablishment of the Irish
branch of the Church of England.
6. The arbitration of the Alabama case.
7. The progress of transportation and of the rapid transmission of
inteligence was marked by the extension of railways to al parts
of hte British Isles and to many other parts of the Empire; the
introduction of the telegraph and the telephone; the laying of the
Atlantic cable; the introduction of penny postage; the rise of
cheap newspapers, of photography, of wireless telegraphy, and of
the use of electricity to drive street cars and machinery.
8. The progress of education was marked by the establishment of
practicaly free elementary schools, free libraries, and the
abolition of religious tests in the universities.
9. The progress of science and philosophy was shown by the
introduction of painless and also of antiseptic surgery, the use of
the German X ray, and the rise and spread of the Darwinian theory
of Evolution.
10. Other events having far-reaching results were the terrible Irish
famine, the Opium War, the Crimean War, the rebelion in India,
the Trent affair, the war in the Sudan, and the great Boer War.
11. Finaly, we see the important work accomplished in India, Egypt,
and other parts of Africa; the acquisition of the control of the
Suez Canal; and the great expansion of the power of the Empire in
Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
EDWARD VII—1901-1910
625. End of the Boer War (1902); Completion of Imperial Federation, 1910.
Not long after Edward VII came to the throne the Boers (S623) laid down their arms (1902) and recognized the
King as their true and lawful Sovereign. The announcement set the "joy bels" ringing al over Great Britain.
Under Edward VII the Crown became the center of a greart movement for more complete Imperial Unity. We
have seen that the process of forming a federation of Great Britain and her widely scattered colonies had made
good progress under Victoria (SS618, 619). She had seen the creation of the Dominion of Canada (1867), the
Dominion of New Zealand (1875), and the consolidation of the six Australian colonies into the Commonwealth
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
277/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
of Australia (1901). Nine years later (1910) the four states which had been the scene of the Boer War (S623)
were consolidated in like manner and received the name of the Union of South Africa.[1] Boer and Briton seem
now to have made up their minds to live together as one family, and, as farmers and stock raisers, they wil work
out their destiny on the land. Speaking of the political significance of this event, a prominent official in South
Africa said, "Without the influence of King Edward I, I do not think the union could have been effected."
[1] The Union of South Africa is formed of the states of the Cape of Good Hope, the Transvaal, and the Orange
Free State. Lord Gladstone, son of the late W.E. Gladstone, was appointed Governor of the new
Commonwealth, and General Botha, who had commanded in the Boer army, was made Prime Minister.
The establishment of the Union of South Africa completed the framework of the Imperial Federation (SS618,
619). Admiral Mahan, of the American navy, classes the expansion of the British Empire with that of the
expansion of the United States, and declares that it ranks as one of the foremost facts of "contemporaneous
history." The Commonwealth of Australia and the Union of South Africa (with the Dominion of New Zealand)
mark the southern limit of the Imperial Federation. The Dominion of Canada marks its northeren limit. (See map
facing p. 422.)
Al these British possessions enjoy a degree of self-government which fals but little short of entire independence.
In fact, commercialy they are independent, for, as we have seen (S616), while England maintains free trade, her
colonies stil keep up a strict protective tariff and impose duties even on British imports. Notwithstanding this
difference, al the colonies are loyal subjects of the English Crown, and al stand ready to defend the English flag.
626. The League of Empire.
While this successful movement toward Imperial Federation was going on, the organization of the League of
Empire had been formed (1901) to cooperate with it and strengthen it.
The League is nonpolitical and nonsectarian. It aims to unite the different parts of the Imperial Federation by
intelectual and moral bonds. It appeals to the whole body of the people of the Empire, but it deals especialy
with the children in the schools. It endeavors to educate them in the duties of citizenship, and it cals on them to
salute the national flag as the symbol of patriotism, of unity, and of loyalty. A little later, Empire Day was
established (1904) as a public holiday to help forward the work of the League. King Edward gave it his hearty
encouragement, and it is celebrated throughout the British Isles and the self-governing colonies of the Imperial
Federation.
627. The King's Influence in Behalf of Peace.
While seeking to make al England and English dominions in one spirit, King Edward constantly used his influence
to maintain peace both at home and abroad. He was a man whose natural kindliness of heart endowed him with
the double power of making and of keeping friends. Furthermore, he was a born diplomatist. He saw at once the
best method of handling the most difficult questions. Those who knew him intimately said that "he always did the
right thing, at the right time, in the right way."
To a great extent he was a creator of international confidence. In his short reign he succeeded in overcoming the
old race feeling which made England and France regard each other as enemies. Again, Russia and England had
been on unfriendly terms for nearly two generations, but the King, by his strong personal influence, brought the
two countries to understand each other better.
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
278/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
He saw that Europe needed peace. He saw that the outbreak of a general war would strike the laboring man a
terrible blow, and would destroy the fruits of his toil. When he ascended the throne (1901) the contest with the
Boers in South Africa was stil going on. General Botha, one of the Boer leaders, publicly stated that the King
did everything in his power to secure the establishment of an honorable and permanent peace between the
combatants. More than that, even, he was in favor of granting a large measure of self-government to the very
people who had only just laid down the arms with which they had been fighting him.
But the King's influence for good was not limited to the Old World. It extended across the Atlantic. Mr. Choate,
who was formerly our ambassador to England, said that Edward VII endeavored to remove every cause of
friction between Great Britain and America. While he lay on a sick bed he signed a treaty relating to the Panama
Canal, which made "it possible for the United States to construct the waterway and to protect it forever."[1]
[1] This was the treaty repealing the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850. See the address of Honorable Joseph H.
Choate before the New York Chamber of Commerce, June 2, 1910.
628. The Politcal Battle in England; Labor gets into Parliament, 1906.
But the King's success in international politics did not secure peace in the field of home politics. Organized labor
had long been bent on pushing its way into Parliament. In a few cases, like that of Joseph Arch (S600), it had
elected a representative,[2] but these were scattered victories which made no great impression.
[2] Besides Joseph Arch, such men as John Burns and J. Keir Hardie.
The real upheaval came in the General Election of 1906. That contest wrought a silent revolution. Up to that
date, with very few exceptions, the wealthy class was the only one which had been represented in the House of
Commons. Furthermore, it cost a good deal of money for any candidate to get into the House, and as members
drew no pay, it cost a good deal more money to remain there.
In 1906 the Liberal Party and the Labor Party gained a sweeping victory over the Conservative Party, and Sir
Henry Campbel-Bannerman, the Liberal Prime Minister, came into power, 1906-1908. Out of the six hundred
and seventy members who had been elected to the House of Commons, fifty-four came from the ranks of the
workingmen,—those to whom life means an unending struggle to live.[3] The combined Labor voters sent these
men to represent them in Parliament, and then raised a fund to meet the expense of keeping them there.[4]
[3] John Burns, who was one of the earliest workingmen to enter Parliament as a Labor leader, said of himself,
"Came into the world with a struggle, struggling now, with prospects of continuing it." [4] But later, the Court of Appeal (S588) decided that the Labor Party could not legaly compel any member of the Labor Union to
contribute to this fund against his wil. Now (1911) Parliament pays al members of the Commons (see S591).
These "Laborites," as they are popularly caled, claim that their influence secured the passage of the Old Age Pensions Act (1908), for the relief of the aged and deserving poor; the Act for Feeding Destitute School
Children; and the Act establishing Labor Exchanges (1909) throughout the country to help those who are looking
for work.
The entrance of the working class and of the Socialists into Parliament marks the transference of power from the
House of Commons directly to the mass of the people. Public opinion is now the real active force in legislation,
and the lawmakers are eager to know what "the man in the street" and the "man with the hoe" are thinking.
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
279/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
This closeness of touch between Parliament and People has evident advantages, but it also has at least one
serious drawback. In times of great public excitement it might lead to hasty legislation, unless the House of Lords
should be able to interpose and procure the further consideration of questions of vital importance which it would
be dangerous to attempt to settle offhand (S631).
629. The Budget; Woman Suffrage; the Content with the Lords.
Mr. Asquith, the Liberal Prime Minister,[1] found that the Government must raise a very large amount of money
to defray the heavy cost of the old-age pensions (S628) and the far heavier cost of eight new battleships. Mr.
Lloyd George, the Chancelor of the Exchequer, or Secretary of the Treasury, brought in a Budget[2] which
roused excited and long-continued debate. The Chancelor's measure caled for a great increase of taxes on real
estate in towns and cities where the land had risen in value, and on land containing coal, iron, or other valuable
minerals.[3]
[1] Mr. Asquith succeeded Sir Henry Campbel-Bannerman, the Liberal Prime Minister (S628), who died in the
spring of 1908. [2] The official estimate of the amount of money which the Government must raise by taxation to
meet its expenses for the year, together with the scheme of taxation proposed, are caled the Budget. [3] In al
cases where the owner of the land had himself done nothing to produce the rise in value, the Chancelor caled
that rise the "unearned increment," and held that the owner should be taxed for it accordingly. Most great
landowners and many smal ones execrate the man who made a practical application of this unpalatable phrase.
The House of Commons passed the Budget (1909), but the House of Lords, which includes the wealthiest
landowners in the British Isles, rejected it. They declared that it was not only unjust and oppressive, but that it
was a long step toward the establishment of socialism, and that it threatened to lead to the confiscation of private
property in land. A bitter conflict ensued between the two branches of Parliament.
This contest was rendered harder by the actions of a smal number of turbulent women, who demanded
complete suffrage but failed to get it (SS599, 608).[1] Adopting the methods of a footbal team, they
endeavored to force themselves into the House of Commons; they interrupted public meetings, smashed winows,
assaulted members of the Cabinet, and, in one case, tried to destroy the balots at the pols,—in short, they
broke the laws in order to convince the country of their fitness to take part in making them. Over six hundred of
these offenders were put in prison, not because they asked for "Votes for Women," but because they
deliberately, persistently, and recklessly misconducted themselves.
[1] The great majority of woman suffragists refused to adopt these violent methods.
630. A New Parliamentary Election; the Lords accept the Budget.
The rejection of the Budget by the House of Lords (S629) caused a new Parliamentary election (1910). The
Liberal Party with the Labor Party again won the victory, but with a decidedly diminished majority. Mr. Asquith,
the Liberal Prime Minister, declared that the policy of the Liberal Government forbade any concessions whatever
to the Lords. The Lords thought it unwise to carry the contest further, and when the new Parliament met they
bowed to the inevitable and reluctantly voted to accept the Budget,—land taxes and al.[2]
[2] The Liberal Party in power threatened, in case the Lords continued to refuse to accept the Budget, that they
would either request the King to create a sufficient number of Liberal Peers to carry it (S582), or that they would
make the country go through another election.
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
280/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
631. New Warships; a New Domesday Book; Death of King Edward.
This acceptance of the Budget made the Government feel reasonably sure that it would get the 16,000,000
pounds required to pay for eight new battleships (S629). It also encouraged the War Department to spend a
considerable sum in experimenting with military airships as a means of defense against invasion. Great Britain, like
Germany, believes that such vessels have become a necessity; for since a foreigner flew across the Channel and
landed at Dover (1909), England has felt that her navy on the sea must be supplemented by a navy above the
sea. Two of these government airships are now frequently seen cricling at express speed around the great dome
of St. Paul's.
The Government also began preparations for the compilation of a new Domesday Book (S120), which should
revalue al the land in the British Isles, in order to establish a permanent vasis for increased taxation.[1] The
House of Commons furthermore took up the debate on adopting measures for limiting the power of Lords to
veto bils passed by the Commons. While they were so engaged King Edward died (May 6, 1910); his son was
crowned in 1911, with the title of George V.
[1] The last general valuation of the land was made in 1692; it was then fixed at 9,000,000 pounds. The land tax,
based on this valuation, has yielded about 2,000,000 pounds annualy. The Government expects that the new
valuation wil yield much more.
In the summer of 1911 Mr. Asquith, the Liberal Prime Minister, after prolonged and heated discussion, forced
the House of Lords to accept the Veto Bil, which is now law. He did this by using the same threat which enable
Earl Grey to carry the Reform Bil of 1832 (S582). The Veto Act makes it impossible for the House of Lords to
defeat any Public Bil which the House of Commons has passed for three successive sessions, extending over a
period of not less than two years. This momentous Act was passed at a critical time when the great Dockers
Strike had practicaly closed the port of London, and had cut off the chief food supply of the city. A little later,
the Prime Minister passed the Salary Bil, which pays the members of the House of Commons 400 pounds
annualy (S591). Next, the Government passed (1911) the Workmen's Compulsory Insurance Bil against
sickness and unemployment. The worker and his employer contribute smal sums weekly, the Government gives
the rest. The law has an excelent motive.
632. General Summary of the Development of the English Nation.
Such is the condition of the English nation in the twentieth century and in the reign of King George V. Looking
back to the time when Caesar landed in Britain, we see that since that period an island which then had a
population of a few thousand "barbarians" (SS4, 18) has gradualy become the center of a great and powerful
empire (SS14, 15).
The true history of the country began, however, not with Caesar's landing, but with the Saxon invasion in 449,
about five centuries later. Then the fierce blue-eyed German and Scandinavian races living on the shores of the
Baltic and North Seas took possession of Britain. They, with the help of the primitive British, or Celtic, stock,
laid the foundation of a new nation. Their speech in a modified form, their laws, and their customs became in
large degree permanent.
Later, missionaries from Rome converted this mixed population to the Christian faith. They baptized Britain with
the name England, which it has ever since retained (S50).
www.gutenberg.org/cache