ference of the
Hague? It was a grand opportunity, which they no more dreamt of seizing,
than the thought of asking that the Bey of Tunis should take part in it.

These documents referred to by us prove that the Suzerainty Question was
not raised at the last moment, as the _Temps_ of September 15th, 1899,
is affirmed to have stated; that it was not raised only in 1898, as
stated by Dr. Kuyper; that at least it was raised on March 6th, 1897;
that, since the last mentioned date, it has given rise to an important
correspondence; and, finally, that it was the first subject raised by
President Krueger at the Bloemfontein Conference.

CHAPTER XVI.

THE ARBITRATION QUESTION.[22]

1.--_How the Transvaal interprets Arbitration._

According to the idea prevailing throughout Europe, President Krueger had
conceded everything from the franchise point of view, when all was
ruined by Mr. Chamberlain raising the Suzerainty Question at the last
moment. We have seen the value of these two assertions.

Then, certain members of the ultra peace party ask hotly: "Why did he
not accept arbitration?" The word in itself appears to them to possess
some sovereign virtue. Dr. Kuyper seems to me to be suffering from that
terrible intellectual malady psittacism when he exclaims:--

"Arbitration is the _mot d'ordre_ of modern civilisation."

and he adds:--

"As if arbitration were not the rule between _masters_ and
_workmen_."

I have often demonstrated the "illusion of such arbitration" (among
others see _Le Siecle_, October 6th, 1899), the negative effects
produced in France by the law on optional arbitration, and in England by
the Conciliation Act of 1896.

From an international point of view, the judgment passed by the
Arbitration Tribunal in the matter of the Delagoa Bay Railway, after a
lapse of ten years, is not one to induce governments to have recourse to
it.

In the relations between England and the Transvaal, the Arbitration
Question is closely connected with the Suzerainty Question. It was
raised May 7th, 1897, by the State Secretary, Mr. Van Boeschoten, in
reply to the complaints made in Mr. Chamberlain's despatch of March 6th,
1897, relating to the violation of the 1884 Convention. Mr. Van
Boeschoten's proposal was that the President of the Swiss Confederation
should be asked to appoint an arbitrator.

On October 16th, 1897, Mr. Chamberlain replied:--

"The Government of the South African Rep