calculated to ensure justice being done. Before proceeding with the
murder trial Dr. Krause took criminal action against Mr. Dunn for
libel, and in order to prove the libel he, whose duty it was to
prosecute Jones for murder, entered the witness-box and swore that
under the circumstances as known to him he did not consider that
Jones had been guilty of murder, and had therefore faithfully
performed his duty in charging him with the minor offence and
releasing him on bail. Further, he called upon the Second Public
Prosecutor to testify in a similar strain; and finally he directly
and deliberately associated with himself as witness on his side the
man Jones himself who was charged with the murder. All this
ostensibly to prove a paltry libel which could have been dealt with
quite as effectively and infinitely more properly after the trial for
murder had taken place; indeed it is incontestable that the verdict
in the murder trial should properly have been relied upon to a large
extent to determine the gravity of Mr. Dunn's offence. It had
appeared to the British population that the chance of an impartial
trial, with the jury drawn exclusively from the burgher class, was
sufficiently remote without any proceedings so ill considered as
these. The result fulfilled anticipations. In due course the
constable Jones was indicted for culpable homicide and acquitted; and
the presiding judge (Mr. Kock, who as already described had claimed a
judgeship as a 'son of the soil') when discharging the prisoner said,
'With that verdict I concur and I hope that the police under
difficult circumstances will always know how to do their duty.'

After the preliminary examination of Jones the Acting British Agent
had written to the Acting High Commissioner (December 30, 1898): 'I
will only remark that the enclosed report ... seems to show that the
Public Prosecutor (Krause), who has been deeply offended by the slur
cast upon his judgment through the orders from Pretoria to keep the
accused in prison instead of out on bail, was more inclined to defend
than to prosecute and showed an extraordinary desire to incriminate
either the British Vice-Consul or the South African League for what
he termed contempt of court in connection with the publication of
certain affidavits in the _Star_.'

That was indeed the position. In this as in the Cape Boys case (the
Lombaard inquiry) the aim of the prosecution appeared to be to prove
that the British Vice-Consu