The Dominion. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1912. BOTHA AND HIS POLICIES.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1573, 17 October 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1912. BOTHA AND HIS POLICIES.

The typical Dutch politician of the days of ICruoer was a man voluble in speech and generous in promises, but one slow to act, and particularly limited in performance. In tho llaads of the two Republics ho • flourished • amazingly. What legislation he considered almost invariably had for its chief object the despoiling of ihe Uitlandcrs, to provide revenue for the benefit of the oprccht boercn. This class of politician was usually illogical in the highest degree, innocent of historical truths, and scornful of treaties. Compacts made when the,. British had prevented the warlike Zulus over-running tho Transvaal, and, it might have been, exterminating the entire Dutch community, were, in after years, insolently ignored, sometimes defiantly broken. ' But nowadays the world is invited to believe that tho Dutch politician has undergone some wonderful transformation:, that he no longer casts envious glances towards the progressive newcomers; that he says what he means, , , and docs what he promises. There are sceptics, however, who find it difficult to reconcile recent happenings with straightforwardness and sincerity of purpose. Were, for example, General Botha's speeches in London, and sometimes in the Union Parliament at Cape Town, accepted as the sole criteria the present Government of South. Africa might safely be considered as consisting of, not brilliant, but at least sensible and fairly broad-minded men. But what reliance can bo placed upon a Prime Minister who has one policy for London and for British audiences, and another, diametrically opposed, for the back-veld and the reactionary Dutch?

General Botha, when in London, created something like , enthusiasm by his ardent advocacy of peace between the people of South Africa. Further, each of the four provinces, he declared, was in need of white settlers, and the Union Government was "to leave no stone unturned" so that South Africa in the near future would be occupied by a peaceful and a prosperous white community. In giving expression to sentiments and promises so excellent, the commonest platitudes were employed, but they were safe platitudes, and to the Home public and press they were clear indications of a profound loyalty, and of a patriotism that was far-reaching as it was magnanimous. The London speeches have since done duty in South Africa, and that on several occasions. But General Botha's burning desire' for peace and for population has to the present time advanced not a jot beyond the stage of speech-making. At Frcdcrikstad last month he uttered tho old familiar things about his determination to bring white settlers 'to South Africa, dwelling at length on the _ vigorous policy the Government "intended to pursue in attracting immigrants." The Gape Times seems inclined to encourage the General, bnt is obviously very sceptical. After alluding to the London speech the Cape journal says:

But the country was naturally bewildered when it heard simultaneously from General Ilertzog the enunciation of tho doctrine that immigration is folly; that a country is happiest with a small population ; that there vas no room for immigration at the present time. . . . But assurances should be followed up by concrete action. A merely pious declaration that immigrants are wanted will not go very far to further immigration. The fact is that, while professing a belief in an immigration policy, the present Government has done absolutely nothing to-pro-mote it.' The Natal Mercury on the same subject has the following:—"Those in authority ' regard anything in the nature of additional population strictly from the political point of view. They fear for the continuance of their majority, and accordingly they do nothing, with the result that the progress of the country is retarded and desirable immigrants pass us by, bound for other lands where the newcomer is made welcome."

The amount of sincerity in Geneiul Botha's .professed desire for peace between Dutch and British seems likely to be estimated in South Africa by his non-activity against General Hertzog's absurd and dangerous doctrines of immigration and of bilingualism. If the Prime Minister bo sincere, he has. confessed himself as timid or incompetent: as being unable to guide aright the policy of his Government, or to restrain the anti-British proclivities of more than one of his colleagues in the .Cabinet. Reference has been made to the disregard nf logic and of historic fact which, to a degree that was almost abnormal, characterised the old type of Dutch politician. But utterances of some of the present Union Ministers must at< times create painful feelings among their more enlightened sympathisers. Take by way of example what was said five weeks ago by Mr. Malax, Minister for Education, in defending General Hejitzog and his bilingual theories, In the United Kingdom; be safely informed a

Natal meeting, "three languages a;-o still spoken, namely, English, Welsh and Gaelic, and the nationalism of the British Empire covers these three languages." He failed to understand why they could not get along as pleasantly in South Africa as they do in the United Kingdom. The Katal Mercury courteously proffered enlightenment. "Let Mn. LloydGeouge propose to enforce the use of Welsh in the public schools of Birmingham," said the Mercury, "or let the Secretary for Scotland propose to make proficiency in Gaelic essential to promotion in the Civil Service in London—and see what will happen!" Two months ago General Botha absented himself from the dedication of the monument to Cecil Rhodes, and attended a public meeting at which he extolled Krhgek, but made no allusion to the historic Ceremony then proceeding on the slopes of Table Mountain, The week before the lat-est-arrived mail left he is found describing Rhodes as a "great Afrikander," and alluding to "our friend's lofty conceptions and high aims in his self-imposed task of shaping the destiny of this sub-con-tinent." What is the probable explanation,! When Rhodes' and his monument were superciliously ignored, General Botha was amidst his own back-veld supporters; when Rhodes is his "friend" he is addressing himself to an audience almost exclusively British.