tranquillity, would be ready to act in this more liberal spirit.

Again we see in the rapidly growing communities of Rhodesia, Salisbury, and Buluwayo other centres whence trouble may arise, if they are allowed to develop in a manner out of harmony with, and out of touch with, the South African system. We may quote Madison in the Federalist-" The influence of faction leaders," he says, "may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire state." This indicates both the nature of the trouble and the remedy which union offers.

In South Africa the early tendencies and inclinations in these newly settled territories would be towards union. The homogeneity of feeling derived from the admixture of a large number of persons from the old states with those who are arriving from Europe, would be made use of to the full, before it has time to disappear in an exclusive attachment to purely local institutions. The natural authority

possessed by such persons with new-comers, owing to their larger acquaintance with the country and its conditions, an authority out of all proportion greater than that given by their mere numbers, would be enlisted in favour of unity at the time best suited for its operation. Thus it is for the present inhabitants of South Africa to consider, and to settle on a sound basis of national union, the lines on which the future development of the states is to take place. Let them follow the precedent set them by the great statesmen of America, who, seizing the fateful moment, sank all petty aspirations, jealousies, and separate advantages in the fabric of a splendid union, the greatness of which grows and increases yearly and even daily, and the future of which no man can foresee.

"A firm union," says Hamilton, "will be of the utmost moment to the peace and liberty of the states, as a barrier against domestic faction and insurrection. It is impossible to read the history of the petty republics of Greece and Italy without feeling sensations of horror and disgust at the distractions with which they were continually agitated, and at the rapid succession of revolutions by which they were kept in a state of perpetual vibration between the extremes of tyranny and anarchy. If they exhibit occasional calms, these only serve as short-lived contrasts to the furious storms that are to succeed. If now and then intervals of felicity open to view, we behold them with a mixture of regret, arising from the real reflection that the pleasing scenes before us are soon to be overwhelmed by the tempestuous waves of sedition and party rage. If momentary rays of glory break forth

from the gloom, while they dazzle us with a transient and fleeting brilliancy, they at the same time admonish us to lament that the vices of government should pervert the direction, and tarnish the lustre, of those bright talents and exalted endowments for which the favoured soils that produced them have been so justly celebrated.

"From the disorders that disfigure the annals of those republics the advocates of despotism have drawn arguments, not only against the forms of republican government, but against the very principles of civil liberty. They have decried all free government as inconsistent with the order of society, and have indulged themselves in malicious exultation over its friends and partisans. Happily for mankind, stupendous fabrics reared on the basis of liberty, which have flourished for ages, have, in a few glorious instances, refuted their gloomy sophisms. And, I trust, America will be the broad and solid foundation of other edifices, not less magnificent, which will be equally permanent monuments of their errors."

This was indeed prophetic! Has South Africa an equal ambition? has it the men who can put it in the way of realizing that ambition? namely, that it too may lay the broad and solid foundation of another edifice, not less magnificent, which will be an equally permanent monument.

Hamilton proceeds to meet an objection offered to union that it would diminish the freedom of the states and tend to destroy their individuality. As this objection would have some force in Africa, we quote his words:

"The inordinate pride of state importance has suggested to some minds an objection to the principle of a guaranty in the Federal Government, as involving an officious interference in the domestic concerns of the members. A scruple of this kind would deprive us of one of the principal advantages to be expected from union, and can only flow from a misapprehension of the nature of the provision itself. It could be no impediment to reforms of the state constitutions by a majority of the people in a legal and peaceable mode. This right would remain undiminished. The guaranty could only operate against changes to be effected by violence. Towards the preventions of calamities of this kind, too many checks cannot be provided. The peace of society and the stability of government depend absolutely on the efficacy of the precautions adopted on this head. Where the whole power of the government is in the hands of the people, there is the less pretence for the use of violent remedies in partial or occasional distempers of the state. The natural cure for an ill-administration, in a popular or representative constitution, is a change of men. A guaranty by the national authority would be as much levelled against the usurpations of rulers as against the ferments and outrages of faction and sedition in the community."

CHAPTER VII.

THE EXCLUSION OF FOREIGN INTERFERENCE.

Danger of foreign interference-Arguments of FederalistInterference of Germany-Deliberate plan-German annexations-Danger of adding interference of another power in South Africa-Estrangement of Transvaal— Territory necessary for South African system—Similar question in America in 1787-Successful solution in America-Loss of valuable territories owing to supineness of British Government-Walwich Bay-Delagoa BayUnion necessary to enforce claims-Failure of English statesmen to understand South Africa-Mr. Gladstone's opinion-Complication of many factors-Difficulty of discovering true South African opinion-A neglected warning-Sir Owen Lanyon's military rule-Disastrous results—The late Sir John Molteno's views on exclusion of foreign interference.

We have now examined the necessity for union and the advantages to be derived from it, in securing the domestic peace of the component parts and preserving an amicable spirit in their interstate relations, while preserving for each its special form of government, and guaranteeing it against internal disturbances. We have now to pursue our investigations from a different aspect, namely, the preservation of the union from outside foreign interference. This subject