e merits of
the particular case may be it appeared to be a shocking exhibition
of arbitrary power to dismiss without compensation, pension, or
provision of any sort, a man no longer young, whose services had been
given for nearly a quarter of a century, who in the extreme dilemma
of the Raid had stood by the President, and who, from some points of
view, must be admitted to have served him 'not wisely but too well.'

Mr. Kotze was not at that time popular among the Uitlanders on
account of his action in the matter of the Reformers, and especially
because he had acted on behalf of the Government in securing the
services of Mr. Gregorowski for the Reform trial; but the
circumstances of his dismissal and the fact that he was known to be
dependent upon his salary as judge, taken in conjunction with the
courageous stand which he had made against the President's arbitrary
will, enlisted public sympathy on his behalf, and a purse amounting
in all to about L6,000 was presented to him as a mark of appreciation
for his past services. But then followed the 'most unkindest cut of
all.' Mr. Gregorowski, who had resigned a judgeship in order to fill
the post of State Attorney when Dr. Coster, in consequence of an
insulting reference of the President's to his countrymen,
relinquished it,--Mr. Gregorowski, who had been foremost to declare
that no honourable man could possibly accept the position of judge
while Law 1 of 1897 stood on the Statute Book, became Chief Justice
_vice_ Mr. Kotze dismissed. And by way of finally disposing of the
subject, the President when questioned in the Raad as to the
explanation of his apologist, denied that he had ever made any
promise of any sort or description to Sir Henry de Villiers or
anybody else!

Mr. Justice Ameshof, who with Mr. Kotze had made a stand against the
President in this matter, was also obliged to relinquish his
judgeship. Thus it will be seen that at one swoop Mr. Kruger disposed
of three reputable intermediaries whom he had used to great advantage
at one time or another. 'Something for nothing,' for Mr. Kruger!
Whether Mr. Kotze acted in haste or whether Sir Henry de Villiers'
plea for more time was justified are questions which it is no longer
necessary to discuss, not alone because Mr. Kruger denied ever having
made the promise out of which the disagreement arose, but because
even up to the present time no measure safeguarding the High Court
has been introduced or foreshadowed in