Ellis's upbringing had taught him that at all times war was a hideous calamity, but in the present case he could not help feeling that so little had been done to prevent the outbreak of hostilities that the crime of the war and the suffering which it brought to thousands lay heavily on the shoulders of those who were responsible for the conduct of the negotiations at the Cape. Bitter as were these thoughts to him, they only served to increase and broaden the spirit of humanity which was such an outstanding feature of his character. Although he was suffering from severe asthma and consequent depression he took an active part in the local efforts on behalf of those who were the sufferers, and there is ample evidence in the diaries of his devonow engaged. The gravity of the struggle must now have been brought home to the minds of those even who, when Parliament met in October, seemed to go about with a light heart. To confront the state of things with resolution and dignity surely all that makes for national unity should be encouraged, and all that contributes to the contrary should be repressed. The Opposition has been lectured in no uncertain and, at times, not too courteous tones that it is its duty to lay aside all political or party controversy and to support the Government, as the executive of the national mind and will, with respect to the war. Surely a corresponding obligation, almost of honour, rests on the members of that national executive not to run (in the persons of the chiefest of them) hither and thither to public platforms, raising such acute points of political controversy as affairs in South Africa. How the war arose, its merits, what is to be done when it is over, all these and many other matters have, of course, many aspects, and will in due time have to be dealt with in and by Parliament. When Parliament assembles I do not think the Government will find any indisposition on the part of many of us to express our opinions and give effect to them by our votes. For the moment, however, I hope you will allow me the opportunity, through your columns, of urging the view that in this hour, almost of national mourning, certainly of universal sympathy with those who are mourning, we may be spared the clamour of political polemics, and that to this end the leading members of the Government should set the example. Dec. 16, 1899. I am, yours faithfully, 1900] PEACE MEETINGS tion of time and money to the War Relief Funds in his neighbourhood. On Christmas Day he mentions calling on the mother of a reservist at Scalby. "A sad Christmas for her and for thousands." Notwithstanding the strain occasioned by his illhealth he was assiduous in his duties at St. Stephen's when the first session of 1900 began. His questions as to the censorship of correspondence (public and private), the treatment of non-combatants, and the administration of martial law were frequent and searching. There is no doubt that during these months he felt the strain of responsibility to be at times overpowering, but the calm self-reliance of the spiritual part of his nature asserted itself, and we find him. writing, amidst all the obloquy and persecution of the war fever, "I am feeling much helped in this grave matter of the war and its consequences." At such a time the right of free speech, if such speech proceeded from the party who favoured peace, was once again being assailed throughout the country. Meetings were everywhere being broken up, some with great violence and disorder, and these proceedings, if not exactly condoned by the war party, were certainly not condemned by them. A striking instance had occurred at Scarborough, where a private meeting attended by Mr. Cronwright Schreiner had received ruffianly treatment at the hands of a hostile crowd. Ellis took the matter up warmly and his action is indicated in the letter which follows: To E. R. C. House of Commons, 13 March, 1900. I telegraphed you asking for full details of the sad occurrences in Scarborough last evening, and hope the morning's post may bring them. Sir H.C-B. raised the general question of disorder to-day and Balfour asked that it might be postponed till Thursday, when it will come up again. If the Home Secretary will maintain the same attitude in the House publicly as he has done in a talk I have had with him some good will be done. He tells me Balfour is very strong in detestation of this outbreak of violence.1 It now has got to a pass that touches the elementary right of the citizen and is far above and beyond the incidents of any particular place. In May he published a pamphlet entitled Speeches on South African Affairs, which may yet be referred to with advantage by readers anxious to acquaint themselves with the facts. He complains that "for every column of more or less relevant and often imaginative military details in the newspapers one can find with difficulty six lines as to what is happening politically in South Africa. Even that modicum appears to be carefully doctored' by the 'Censorship Department,' whatever they may mean. . . I have myself great confidence that if only the electorate of this country becomes properly acquainted with the political facts it will declare that the only course to be pursued must be in the words of Lord Salisbury spoken within the last fortnight, a policy of appeasement, of affection, and of co-operation.' 1 Two days later in the House, Mr. Balfour "strongly deprecated these demonstrations but feared those who called peace meetings' ask more of human nature than all history shows that human nature is capable of giving." CHAPTER XI THE KHAKI ELECTION PARLIAMENT was dissolved at the end of September, 1900. The Government made an appeal to the country on the single issue of the South African War. Mr. Balfour declared this to be the one "essential question" of the day, and the constituencies returned the Conservatives to office. The elections were embittered by the strong feelings aroused by the war, and in many parts of the country personalities were introduced into the contest in a degree unknown since the Reform Bill of 1832. Mr. Chamberlain gave a lead, to which his followers only too readily responded, when he said, Every seat lost to the Government is a seat gained by the Boers." Whatever justification there may have been for that statement, there was very little for the natural development of it, that Boer and Radical are synonymous terms, and therefore all Radicals are enemies of England, and traitors. Mr. Chamberlain may not have meant it, but his followers soon said it, and the Conservative associations printed it, or something very much like it. The election addresses of the Conservative party dealt mainly with this issue, and consequently the election has been called the " Khaki Election." In the Rushcliffe Division Ellis was opposed by a Mr. John Robinson, a wealthy brewer who had generously contributed to local objects. He appeared as the standard-bearer of the Imperial and Unionist cause against those who were "the friends of every country but their own," to quote the words of his election address. The contest was quite was quite the most severe of those in which Ellis had taken part, for no pains were spared to defeat him. At the same time, except for a certain exaggeration of language, it must be admitted that the fight was fairly fought within the constituency. It was from an outside source, and from a Minister of the Crown that an attack was made on John Ellis, which, to say the least, he regarded as unjustifiable. Upon this particular issue the greatest stress was laid by the Unionists throughout the contest. The facts upon which the attack was based were these. A certain acquaintance of John Ellis, a Mrs. Solly, a British subject, the daughter of a Liverpool merchant of considerable standing, had married an official in the service of the Cape railways. This lady took considerable interest in all questions affecting the social conditions of the people. Whilst living in Cape Colony, she was stirred by circumstances which she believed to have occurred there in connection with the censorship of telegrams and letters and the administration of martial law. Mrs. Solly wrote to Ellis asking him to bring these matters to the attention of Parliament and before the public. In reply, Ellis pointed out that before taking these steps it was essential that the aggrieved ones should be able not merely to prove one isolated instance of oppression on the part of the military authorities, not merely to adduce hearsay evidence, but |