University of Warwick institutional repository: http://go.warwick.ac.uk ...

522"
Both the 'j. h. 'r# and the I. LP. opposed the war,
Tho S. D. F. took. the line that the war was in the
interests of the capitalists who wished to gain full
control of the goldfields. The war would also retard
social reform by the expense which it entailed.
The S. ri. F, was more pro-Boor than the Liberals
considering that as a republic the Transvaal was more
democratically Governed than Lngland; oyopathy for the
Dutch was equated with sympathy for the Irish and
Indiana,
- all three were oppressed peoples under the
Imperial system. Another strong point wan the lack
of adequate franchise in Dritain« The financial
Imperialism of a Rhodes-Chamberlain conspiracy to seize
the goldfields was stressed and the S. D. F. were loco
concerned than the Liberals with the technicalities of
the suzerainty issue or the negotiations
There was an element in the Z. D. Y, in Lancashire
which was opposed to the official policy. In the
tlanchestor and Salford branch J. Jackson claimed that
the Doers werd thensolvea a capitalist oligarchy unfairly
C'ý) Juntom 20th January 1900
t1}