colonies which we subsequently acquired, by governing them from home, 'taking no service from them, but the expense on ourselves.' It was in this second period that we occupied and acquired the Cape. The prevailing ideas were there applied. We fought for it, and we paid for the fighting, and had the privilege of the full responsibility of government, with results which were far from satisfactory, for a series of Kaffir wars had resulted from our vacillating policy-the effects of an attempt to control a matter of extreme delicacy from a distance.

Notwithstanding the sacrifice of blood and treasure to which we had been put we received but little thanks, and indeed alienated the frontier population to such an extent that they preferred to abandon all their property and go out into the unknown wilds rather than remain under so uncongenial a rule. Under such conditions and such a mode of government, the Cape was indeed an expensive luxury to the English Government.

Speaking in the House of Commons in 1855, Sir W. Molesworth said that our military expenditure at the Cape amounted to between 400,000l. and 500,000l. a year, besides a series of Kaffir wars, which on an average had cost this country 1,000,000l. a year.' To this second period must be referred the attempt to force convicts upon the Cape, with the ever-memorable resistance called out by it—a resistance which so stimulated the demand for representative institutions, that on the presentation of the petition to this effect Sir Harry Smith, the Governor, felt himself compelled, without waiting for instructions, to consent.'

Then comes the third period of our colonial policy, in which the principle of colonial self-government recovered itself. As has already been mentioned, there was no self

1

Sir Charles Adderley, Colonial Policy, p. 169.

*The normal current of colonial history,' says Sir Charles Adderley, 'is perpetual assertion of the right to self-government.'-Colonial Policy, p. 3.

government for a colony for a considerable period after the American war.' To the great groups of colonies in Canada, Australia, and South Africa, we are indebted 'for having refused to submit to any inferior terms of citizenship than such as habitually belong to our nation.' 'The American provinces,' says Sir Charles Adderley, 'have stoutly vindicated a right to responsibility of government. The Australians have thrown off indignantly the stigma of their origin in transportation, redeeming the nobility of colonisation from the servile duties of national scavengers, and South Africa lent to English spirit the fulcrum of a Dutch Back to resist the requisition of a similar service from the mother-country. By struggles like these our colonial

policy has righted itself.' 2

Until 1854 the constitution of the Cape vested the power of legislation in a Governor, appointed by the Crown, assisted by an Executive Council and a Legislative Council, both of which were equally appointed by the Crown. They numbered thirteen members in all, of whom seven (including the Governor and Commander of the Forces) sat by virtue of the offices which they held, while six members, called 'unofficial,' were recommended by the Governor and appointed by the Crown--all held their seats during the pleasure of the Crown. In 1841 the inhabitants of Cape Town and its vicinity, in public meeting assembled, petitioned the Home Government that their government might be assimilated to that of Great Britain, and asked for a Legislative Assembly freely elected by the people.

Sir George Napier, the Governor, backed this petition warmly, attributing in large measure the prevailing ignorance and discontent to the form of government. Lord Stanley refused, but Earl Grey was inclined to grant representative institutions, and referred the matter to Sir Harry Smith, who was now Governor. There is but one opinion,' said Sir H.

1 Lewis, p. 159.

2 Sir Charles Adderley, Colonial Policy, p. 18.

Smith, on the desirableness of the institution of representative government.' Towards the close of 1848, before the convict troubles began, Sir Harry Smith transmitted to Earl Grey a petition from the Commissioners of Municipalities of Cape Town signed 'Hercules Jarvis, Chairman, and Dennyssen, Secretary,' praying for the cession of their long neglected claim for a voice in the management of their own affairs.

The anti-convict agitation now supervened, and, as we have seen, gave so much force to the demand for representative institutions that the Governor was forced to give his consent in advance.

་

At first it was proposed that the Upper Chamber should consist of nominees of the Crown, but to such a pass had official mismanagement brought affairs that Sir John Wylde, the Chief Justice (a brother of Lord Truro), upon being consulted expressed a fear that so completely had Crown nomination begun to stink in the colonial nostrils, that it would actually degrade an upper chamber composed by its means so much as to make it the butt rather than the counterpoise or dignified referee of the more popular assembly.' While, he added, as to the legislative competency of the Colony, no doubt has been or can be raised as to the sufficient extent of its population, its revenue, commerce, or general public interests.'

1

Eventually, after many difficulties, into which it is unnecessary to enter here, a Constitution was established, providing for a Legislative Council to be elected by the Colony in two great constituencies, and a Parliament also elected freely by the people; but Earl Grey declared, in reply to the Attorney-General's recommendation that the Executive should be eligible to the Assembly, that 'the Cape was completely unfit for responsible government.'

Though the wholly elective character of the Legislative

'Sir Charles Adderley, Statement of the Present Cape Case, p. 19.

Council marked an advance of the elective principle beyond what prevailed in any of the other colonies whose upper chambers were without exception constituted either in whole or in part of nominees of the Crown, the advocates of representative institutions were dissatisfied with anything halting short of responsible government. They believed that the British Constitution required not only the presence but the participation of the Executive in the Legislature, prophesying that the attempt to make the Executive independent of the Legislature would be fatal, unless it were maintained by reducing the Legislature to a cipher. These predictions were to be amply verified by the result,' but the difficulties which would otherwise immediately have come into prominence owing to this restriction were deferred by reason of the appointment of Sir George Grey to the Governorship of the Cape and the administration of the new Constitution.

With the attainment of the third stage in the development of responsible government, so long deferred in the case of the Cape Colony, Mr. Molteno's name will ever be associated. The long struggle, resulting in its successful establishment, is to be told in a later portion of this story.

Though a skilful business man, Mr. Molteno was by nature a politician and parliamentarian. The conditions of colonial life were similar to those under which Washington's character was developed; and we may apply the words used by Mr. Lecky of Washington to Mr. Molteno's

The words of Sir Charles Adderley upon this subject are worth quoting :'What is asked for South Africa? Emancipation from England? Separation? No, but the avoidance of separation-fair treatment-the rule of an English colony on English principles. Thus it may become a thriving outstation of the Empire instead of a jobbed location. Thus may we have a real pied-à-terre on our Indian and Australian route, where if we please we may place our forts or naval stations, dockyards, or ports amongst friends and fellowcountrymen. And if a future like that of India's history opens on our African frontier, we may find on the spot a self-acting power controlling and regulating a destined extension of empire, without adding another chapter of peculation, and waste, and bloodshed to the annals of our own country.'-Sir C. Adderley: Statement of the Present Cape Case, p. 36.

circumstances, and to the effects on his character:-'A courteous and hospitable country gentleman, a skilful farmer, a very keen sportsman. . . . it was in a great degree in the administration of a large estate, and in assiduous attention to county and provincial business that he acquired his rare skill in reading and managing men.'1

He had attained a leading position in the district during the ten years he had now resided there and had been a strong supporter of the anti-convict agitation. He is believed to have made his first speech at one of the great meetings held to denounce the action of the Secretary of State in attempting to turn the old and honourable Colony of the Cape into a penal settlement. When representative institutions, of which he had been a leading advocate, were brought into operation in 1854, he stood for Beaufort, to which two seats were assigned. Besides himself there were three candidates, Dr. Christie, Mr. H. Rose, who had long resided in the district, and Mr. J. H. Hofmeyer, LL.D. Mr. Molteno was returned at the head of the poll, Dr. Christie being elected as his colleague. He represented his constituency for a quarter of a century, and only on his resignation in 1878 did his connection with it cease.

Mr. Molteno having had a wide experience of the Colony, knowing its circumstances and its people thoroughly, and being gifted with sound judgment, immediately became a leading member of the new Parliament. Whatsoever his hand found to do, he did it with his might. With the true instinct of the born administrator, he had so arranged his private affairs, whether it were his farming, or his banking, or his commercial business, that he was enabled to devote himself heart and soul to his parliamentary work while the House was sitting.

In the first session of Parliament, he gave evidence of the far-seeing manner in which he regarded the workLecky's England in the 18th Century, vol. iv. p. 210.