§ SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT (Sheffield, Eccleshall)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the attention of Her Majesty's Government has been called to a statement made by President Kruger, at a public banquet in Pretoria, on January 20, to the effect that the Suzerainty of Her Majesty over the Transvaal ceased to exist in 1894; and whether Her Majesty's Government have sent, or intend to send, a Protest to the Boer Government against such repudiation of British Suzerainty?
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON, Tower Hamlets, Poplar)I stated yesterday that we had not, as yet, received the text of President Kruger's speech, referred to in the question, and I cannot, therefore, say he has been accurately reported or no. As regards, however, the question of Suzerainty, we adhere to the statement made by Mr. W. H. Smith, on behalf of the late Government, on February 25, 1890. Mr. Smith pointed out that the Convention of London, made in 1884, between Her Majesty and the South African Republic contained no express reservation of the Queen's right of Suzerainty; but that Her Majesty retained under the Convention the power of refusing to sanction Treaties made by the South African Republic with foreign States and nations, and with certain native tribes. Further, I repeat, what I said yesterday in my 214 speech, that Article IV. of the London Convention makes it clear that, as regards its foreign relations, the South African Republic is within the sphere of British influence, and that the South African Republic can conclude no treaty or engagement with any State or nation (with the exception of the Orange Free State) until the same has been submitted to Her Majesty the Queen for approval. I need hardly point out that no statement made by one party to a Treaty or Convention without the assent of the other, can in any way affect the mutual position of the two parties.