Adamantia : the truth about the South African diamond fields : or, a ...

SIR H. BARKLY DELAYS ARBITRATION. 377The first misrepresentation was rectified by thesentence, "I shall therefore be prepared to acceptthe nomination by your Excellency of anyone of thefour ambassadors named."In a most contradictory despatch, dated July 30,1872, Sir H. Barldy replies, and commences by thedeclaration:"Your Honour's letter of the 10th instant ... seems to removethe only dift'erenoes which remained between us in regard to theconstitution of the tribunal for arbitrating."H so, why, immediately afterwards, did Sir H.Barkly raise a"fresh and absurd objection, involving afurther delay of at least another month or two, by thefallowing proposition ?" And perhaps it wo~d be well to extend the list open to selectionby including the Austrian anel Italian Ambassadors, or the Presidentof the Helvetio Confederation."Very pertinent were the reflections indulged inupon this prevaricating, obstructive prod-qction by theFriend of the Free State (Q. paper of impartiality toowell known throughout South Africa to ~eed my testimony)in its issue of August 15th, 1872 ;-.. It seems somewhat ourious that his Exoellenoy, after. . . settingforth that the President's last 'seems to remove the only differenoes,'etc. . . . should in the following and concluding clauses apparentlyseek to raise fresh difB.culties, and to give further oause, or at least,reasonable exouse for delay . •. What need, for ~stanoe, canthere be to suggest, in addition to the four already named, thenomination of two other Ambassadors ... and the (Swiss) President?. .• Should the . . . four . . . decline to act . . . is itprobable that either of the other three will? . •. It appears toordinary . . . individuals like ourselves a work of supererogationDigitized by G09S Ie