Africa

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXV, Issue 53, 5 March 1915, Page 5

Africa

WHITE BOOK ON THE REBEL. LION. Times and Sydney Sun Service. London, March 4. A White Book issued at Capetown discloses that the motives of the rebellion were factious hatred of the Botha Government, racialist. Republican ideals, and the personal ambition of Beyers and Maritz. There were two abortive attempts before the actual rebellion. The rebels intended to march on Pretoria, hoist the Kepublican flag, release and arm two thousand interned Germans. It is provtd that Maritz was communicating with German agents as early as July, 1912. De Wet's secretary visited the rebels' campfires each night to impart the latest European news.

THREE THINGS SAVED THE COUNTRY. DISCUSSION ON INDEMNITY BILL (Rectived 8.45 a.m.) Capetown, March 4. Mr Smuts: (Minister of Defence) in moving the Indemnity Bill on its second reading omphasised the fact that the rebellion, which was already in progress prior to the war, was due to the machinations of highly-placed persons upon some people seeking independence.

Three things saved the country, first of which was, he said, the loyal support accorded to the Government hy all sections of the people. The Government regarded the rebellion as a blot on the Dutch people, and it was their duty and privilege to wipe out the disgrace. Therefore, they employed the English a s little as possible.

Secondly, the expeditionary troops were switched off from the Germans to the rebels. It was idle to plead that the rebellion was diie to an expedition of Boers, who remembered the bitter experiences of those settling in the German territory after the war.

The third factor was the Government's refusal to surrender to the pressure especially in Orangia to issue an army of civilians wnolesale.

The Government proposed to disqualify for ten years those who surrendered or were captured after the amnesty. Those who were imprisoned will remain until the end of the war. The rebel leaders and other influential will be tried before special courts. Mr Freeman'tle moved that the Bill was inconsistent with the interests of the Union and the Empire.