be regarded as no solution of the question and
might even provoke doubts as to the _bona fides_ of the proposal,
which would be a deplorable beginning, yet one easily to be avoided.

Regard being had to the points raised in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4,
we consider that as restrictive franchise legislation, apparently
designed to exclude for ever the great bulk of the Uitlander
population, dates its beginning from the Session of 1890, and as the
various enactments bearing upon this question have been passed by
successive Volksraads exercising their power to alter, add to, or
revoke, previous enactments, and as the same powers are to the full
enjoyed by the present Volksraad, it would be both possible and
proper for the present Volksraad to annul all the legislation upon
this subject from that date, and to restore and confirm the status
prior to 1890, and thus satisfy the indisputable claims of those who
settled in this country under certain conditions from the benefits of
which they could not properly be excluded.

With regard to paragraph 5, a moderate proposal designed to give a
more equitable distribution of representatives in the Volksraad would
be necessary.

The above suggestions are not put forward as the irreducible minimum,
nor are they designed for public use, nor intended as a proposal
acceptable to the eye but impossible in fact, and thus sure of
rejection. They are put forward in good faith as indicating in our
opinion the lines upon which it would be possible to work towards a
settlement with a reasonable prospect of success.

If the difficulties appear great the more reason there is not to put
forward an unalterable proposal foredoomed to failure, but rather to
try and find points of agreement which, however few and small to
begin with, would surely make for eventual and complete settlement.
In any case it is clear that the mere fact of a proposal to extend
the franchise having been made by the Government, thus frankly
recognizing the need to deal with the subject, will be hailed as a
good omen and a good beginning by all fair-minded men.

The determination of the negotiators to have the position clearly
stated in writing, and their fear that the use of intermediaries
would end in the usual unhappy and unpleasant result--namely,
repudiation of the intermediary in part or entirely--were not long
wanting justification. The following is a translation of Mr. F.W.
Reitz's reply:--

PRETORIA, _8th April,