{24} In the Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons the following questions and answers occur, Mr. Blake questioning and Major Heany replying:
'Having got the message you went off with it and you got in, as we see by the evidence, as quickly as you could, and you just gave the message as accurately as you could to Dr. Jameson?—I read the message from my note-book absolutely accurately to Dr. Jameson.
'And he did not lose much time in making up his mind?—No; he went outside his tent. He was in a bell-tent when I arrived and he went outside and walked up and down for about twenty minutes, and then he came in and announced his determination.'
{25} In the course of the Inquiry at Westminster, Dr. Jameson himself took occasion to explain this reference, when answering a question put by Mr. Sidney Buxton.
Knowing what you do now of the position at Johannesburg, do you think it was within their power to send out 300 mounted men?—I cannot give an opinion upon that; I think all their actions were perfectly bonâ fide. There is one telegram here which has been brought up against me very unpleasantly, which I wish I had never sent, where 'fear' is imputed in the telegram as it stands here. My explanation is that I was irritated at the time at the trouble going on, and that I used it inadvertently, or possibly there is a mistake in deciphering the code word; as to that I cannot tell, but I am sorry that it should appear so in the telegram, because I never imputed fear or cowardice to anyone in connection with anything.
{26} July 1899. The originals have since been photographed and are here reproduced.
{27} Colonel Francis Rhodes.
{28} Lionel Phillips.
{29} (July, 1899.) Is it not probable that the deleted figures '2,000' in Colonel Rhodes' letter (see photograph) may account for some of the talk about 2,000 armed men?
{30} After the arrival in England of the officers of Dr. Jameson's force, a report dealing with the military aspect of the expedition was sent by Sir John Willoughby to the War Office. It has been printed and—to a certain extent—circulated, and cannot therefore be regarded as private. But apart from this it is a document so peculiar—so marked by mishandling of notorious facts—that it deserves no consideration other than it may earn on merits. It is printed in extenso with notes by a member of the Reform Committee. See [Appendix H].