influence the court to give judgment against Brown, et al., and having failed in this, and the court having awarded judgment for the plaintiffs, then Mr. Kruger dismissed Chief Justice Kotze of the High Court and Mr. Justice Ameshoff who concurred with him in that judgment. These men were dismissed from their positions as judges and certain other judges amenable to the executive of Mr. Kruger were appointed instead; these new appointees having taken an oath which practically amounted to pledging them to reverse the judgment previously obtained by Brown, et al., and to deprive them of their rights under that judgment. Mr. Brown appealed to this newly constituted court for the damages awarded him by the first judgment but he was told that he would be obliged to submit to a rehearing of the whole case, which of course meant that the judgment of first instance would be reversed and that he would be deprived of the relief which that judgment gave him and the fruits thereof. Succeeding that, a state of legal chaos ensued with which we are all familiar, during which time the courts administered law according to Mr. Kruger's own desires. These particular mining leases were in the interval allotted to Mr. Kruger's own favourites. A state of anarchy and war followed during which time it was impossible for Mr. Brown to press the claims for himself and his associates. When the war was over, Mr. Brown and the others associated with him sought redress at the hands of Lord Milner, Governor of the South African Colony and on the advice of Sir Richard Solomon, Attorney General of his cabinet, these claims were denied on grounds that I submit are unsatisfactory, but which I will not now detain the House to mention. The reasons given are somewhat lengthy, but suffice it to say that the claims were dismissed on grounds which in the opinion of legal gentlemen who considered the matter and in the opinion of others who pronounced upon their equity, were considered to be wholly inadequate and untenable. Briefly stated it was found by Sir Richard Solomon that Mr. Brown should have pursued his remedy before the newly constituted court which was sworn to administer judgment against him. Of course that would be a useless and fruitless proceeding. The other ground of denial was that the rights of others had intervened and to disturb the holdings of these appointees of Mr. Kruger would be to have created an unsettled condition of affairs in the colony. The answer to that is, that in the the very judgment which awarded Mr. Brown his damages it was found that the allotment by Mr. Kruger of these lands to his friends and favourites was illegal and against the laws of the Transvaal Republic. On all grounds it is submitted that there were no valid grounds for the opinion of the Attorney General of Lord Milner's cabinet. Mr. Brown being an American citizen the American government intervened on his behalf. The United States Senate referred the matter to the Committee on Foreign Relations and a correspondence was carried on by Mr. Secretary Hay, representing the United States and Lord Lansdowne, Foreign Secretary, representing His Majesty's government. As Mr. Brown died during this period and as these Canadians were largely interested, the surviving claimants deemed that the negotiations could be more properly and successfully carried on through the home government and the government of the Canadian colony; the negotiations so far as they were conducted by the United States government ceased. The widow of Brown and the Canadians interested have made repeated efforts to bring the matter to the attention of the imperial authorities, but so far without a successful adjustment of their claims. I desire to ask the government to make an inquiry into the matter, and, if they think fit, to make such representations to the imperial authorities or to the colony of South Africa or both, as will secure justice for these claimants. I think the Canadian people, and Canadian soldiers in particular, have performed such services for the colony of South Africa and for the empire generally, that the rights of Canadians in that colony should be considered. The reciprocal trade relations which at present exist between the South African colony and ourselves should make for the same end. But I think that this matter, on its merits, is a proper subject for inquiry by this government. I would be pleased to hand to the Department of Justice all the documents connected with the case, so that a thorough investigation may be had; and if, in the opinion of the Department of Justice, this claim rests on justice and equity, then I submit that some action should be taken along the lines which I have indicated. Mr. Fitzpatrick.-I understand from what my hon. riend has said, that the parties in question claimed to be the proprietors of certain mining claims in South Africa, that the question of their title being in dispute, was referred to the court; that the court adjudicated on the title in their favour; that the president of the South African republic, Kruger, thought fit to interfere with the action of the court to the extent of dismissing the judges. who were the regularly constituted legal authorities to deal with the matter, and appointing other judges to deal with the case in the interest of his cwn friends; and that in the interval he took possession of the property and disposed of it for their benefit. Under these circumstances, I think it would be proper for the Canadian government to make inquiry, and I will suggest to the Prime Minister that some inquiry should be had and that representations should be made along the lines suggested by the hon. member for South Toronto (Mr. Macdonell). ANNEX 2. Correspondence between the Foreign Office and No. 1. Messrs. Campion and Co. to Foreign Office.-(Received October 3.) Sir, 23, Old Broad Street, London, October 1, 1903. Re Isaacs and others v. Brown's executors. We have been instructed in this matter by Messrs. Adam and B. Alexander, of Johannesburg, on behalf of their clients, Messrs. Isaacs, Hefferman, and Gatton, who, with twelve others, entered into a written agreement, dated the 18th July, 1895, with Mr. R. E. Brown (now deceased), whereby it was agreed that, in consideration of Messrs. Isaacs, Hefferman, Gatton, and the twelve others supplying the said R. E. Brown with their services, they were to receive a proportion of the amount of the claims pegged out by him. The contract was duly given effect to by Messrs. Isaacs, Hefferman, and Gatton and their colleagues. In the year 1897 the late Mr. R. E. Brown instituted an action against the Government of the late South African Republic for possession of the claims pegged out by him, and obtained judgment against that Government for possession of the said claims, and, failing which, payment of 1,000,000l. damages. We are advised by our professional clients that the Government of the United States of America, on behalf of the assignees of Mr. R. E. Brown, are claiming payment of the amount recovered by that gentleman against the Government of the late South African Republic. We should be obliged if you would let us know what is the position of matters and what is being done. And we hereby give you formal notice that our clients, Messrs. Judah Isaacs, William Hefferman, and Jack Gatton, are entitled to fifteen-fiftieths of 60 per cent. of the said claims or of any damages which may be recovered from the late South African Republic or the British Government in respect of the judgment obtained by the late Mr. R. E. Brown against the late South African Republic. We are, &c. H. G. CAMPION AND CO. P.S.-We understand that the matter has been referred by you to the Law Officers of the Crown for their opinion. H. G. C. AND CO. No. 2. Foreign Office to Messrs. Campion and Co. Gentlemen, Foreign Office, October 14, 1903. I am directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 1st instant respecting the claim of the late R. E. Brown against the Government of the late South African Republic. I am to inform you, in reply, that his Lordship is not at present in a position to make any statement as to the correspondence between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States on the matter. I am, &c. F. A. CAMPBELL. No. 3. Messrs. Campion and Co. to Foreign Office.-(Received Sir, May 13.) 23, Old Broad Street, London, May 11, 1904. Re Isaacs and others v. Brown's executors. With reference to our letter to you on this matter of the 1st October last, we shall be glad if you will kindly consider the notice therein given as having been withdrawn. We are, &c. H. G. CAMPION AND Co. |