In the interview with the President which took place immediately after this Mr. Innes was brusquely informed that petitions from the prisoners were of no value, and would receive no consideration; that the President did not want any of their petitions; and that he was guided solely by his burghers, who had already petitioned in the matter. 'I would pay more heed,' said Mr. Kruger, 'to a petition from fifty of my burghers than to one from the whole of Johannesburg.' At the conclusion of an unpleasant interview, which called for all the tact and good temper at the command of the gentleman who was interesting himself on behalf of the prisoners, the President added in an offhand manner, 'The petitions can do no harm and might strengthen my hands in dealing with the rest of the Executive; so they can send them in if they like.'
With this answer Messrs. Innes and Solomon returned to the gaol, and after informing the prisoners of what had taken place advised them, under the circumstances, to make a formal but respectful appeal for a revision of the sentences. It was their opinion, based upon the information which they had at great pains gathered, and it was also the opinion of the Chief Justice, that no petition was necessary, and that the sentences would be brought under the consideration of the Executive by the memorials of the burghers; but they considered that as interested persons or indiscreet friends had already suggested the idea of petitions, and as a refusal now to sign anything might have a very unfavourable effect upon persons with the disposition and character of those with whom they had to deal, it would be advisable to make an appeal so worded as to formally comply with the requirements of the extreme party in the Executive; one which would satisfy those of the prisoners who were in favour of appealing, and would not be offensive to those who were against petitions at any cost.
The strongest reason for urging this was to preserve unanimity of action among the prisoners. The course was in fact a compromise designed to satisfy those who considered a petition of some sort to be necessary, and those who would not as they expressed it 'sacrifice their self-respect' by asking for anything from the people who had treated them in what they deemed to be a dishonest and treacherous manner.
All the prisoners except Messrs. A. Woolls-Sampson and W.D. (Karri) Davies agreed to this: many did so much against their own wishes because of the appeal to stand together, and because it was strongly urged that their obstinacy would affect not only themselves but would prevent the liberation of others whose circumstances were almost desperate. They yielded—it is true—but remained unconvinced. To Messrs. Sampson and Davies the answers of the Chief Justice and the President are now of considerable importance, since the reason given for their detention involves the repudiation of the assurances given by the President and Chief Justice.
Those who had not signed any other form of appeal now made a formal application to have their sentences brought into review by the Executive Council. They stated then their belief that it was only the beginning of the petition business that it would be wholly ineffective and that it was to be understood that they would sign no more under any circumstances. This application was deemed by the emissaries of the Government to be sufficient to comply with the requirements, and promises were conveyed to the prisoners that the sentences would be at once taken into consideration and commutations announced. In the course of a day or two however further demands were made, and the prisoners were informed that they would be dressed in prison garb under severer regulations specially passed for them unless they at once petitioned against this course.
Again Mr. Innes represented their case to the Government at the dictate of his own feelings of humanity, and not prompted thereto by the prisoners themselves, most of whom would have been glad to see the Government wreak their vengeance in petty and vindictive provisions. The proposed alterations were however abandoned without protest from the prisoners after the supply of convict garb had been sent up to the gaol. So matters went on day by day, each day bringing its fresh instalment of threats promises and cajoleries, each morning its batch of disappointments. It was at first difficult to say what object the Government had in view in endeavouring to compel the Reformers to sign petitions, unless it were the unworthy one of desiring to humiliate men who were already down, or the perhaps more contemptible one of forcing them to turn informers by a process of self-excusing and thus enable them to differentiate in the commutations. The fact remained that repeated efforts were made and pressure brought to bear upon the men to induce them to sign. One pretext after another was used. Finally the naked truth came out: the Government required each man to state in an individual declaration the extent of his guilt the extenuating facts and the circumstances under which he became associated with the Reform movement. This was exactly what had been foretold by men who understood Boer methods.
The means resorted to by the gaol officials to enforce this petition-signing were characteristic. The gaoler (Du Plessis) is one of the most unfavourable specimens of his race. Unscrupulous and brutal in his methods, untrustworthy as to his undertakings, and violent and uncertain in his temper, he singled out those among the prisoners whom he considered to be the leaders of the 'stiff-necked' party as he termed it, and treated them with as much severity as he could. These men found themselves unable to obtain those facilities which were regarded as the right of all the prisoners. Upon occasion their food was stopped at the gates, and visitors—their wives and families—were refused admission, although provided with permits from the proper authorities and complying with the gaol regulations; and on more than one occasion he informed individual members of this party that the 'petitions would have to be signed,' that they would have to 'go down on their knees to the Government,' otherwise they would 'rot in gaol.' All this undisguised eagerness to obtain the signatures naturally only strengthened the resolution of the men who stood out. They had already against their wishes and judgment signed one application, and more than that they refused to do. When it was found to be impossible to induce the men to inform against each other, some modification was made in the demands of the petition-hunters and some prisoners were asked and induced to make statements concerning their own part in the late movement, making no allusion to the part played by others, and, for reasons which it is impossible to divine unless it was designed to lead to something more, this was regarded by the Government as a desirable step.
The suspense and disappointment added to the original sentence upon a man who was never even mentioned in evidence and who took no part in the Reform movement, beyond associating himself with the organizations for the protection of property in Johannesburg, told so severely upon one of the prisoners that his mind became unhinged, and in the course of the following period he developed marked signs of homicidal and suicidal mania. His condition was so serious that strong representations were made to all the officials connected with the gaol—the gaoler himself, the district surgeon, the commissioner of police, and the landdrost of Pretoria. The prisoners themselves organized a system of guards or watches over their comrade, pending the result of their representations to the officials. On the fourth day however the unfortunate man, driven out of his mind by the constant and cruel disappointment of purposely raised hopes, eluding the watchfulness of his friends took his own life.
The news of this event was received with horror throughout South Africa, the more so as for some days previously the newspapers had hinted at some such impending catastrophe. In the course of the inquiry which was held evidence was given showing that the gaol surgeon had reported the state of affairs to the proper authorities some days before, but in a formal and half-hearted way. Evidence however was forthcoming that four of the prisoners (themselves medical men) had forcibly represented the extreme seriousness of the case to the gaoler, the gaol surgeon and the landdrost of Pretoria, and had induced the assistant-gaoler and warders to support their representations, but all without avail. The result of the inquiry was to lay partial blame upon the doctor and to acquit everybody else—a result which the public have been used to expect in the Transvaal. It is somewhat difficult to see how the decision was arrived at, seeing that in the offices there was the record of a special pass granted to the unfortunate man's wife to visit him and remain with him for a considerable period on the previous day in order to cheer him up and avert serious consequences. The incident told severely upon the nerves of those who were not themselves in the best of health, and it was found necessary immediately to release or remove others among the prisoners for fear of similar results.
The Government seemed to realize that it was incumbent upon them to do something in order to allay the feeling of indignation which was being roused throughout South Africa at their manner of treating the prisoners, so a further instalment of magnanimity was decided upon. On the day of the unfortunate affair the manager of the Government newspaper, The Press, was authorized by President Kruger and other members of the Executive to inform the prisoners that they would have to make modified personal statements of the nature previously indicated, and if these petitions were presented to the Executive Council by 8 a.m. on the following Monday (the prisoners would then have been three weeks in gaol) orders for their release would be issued by Monday night. In order to secure a favourable reception of this suggestion it was arranged that the clergyman who was to conduct Divine service on Sunday in the gaol would deliver this message from the President to the prisoners at the conclusion of the service, and urge the men for their own sakes and for the sake of their families and of their friends to abandon the position which they had taken up and to sign declarations of the nature required, and so secure their release. Nor was this all. Outside the gaol the wives of those men who stood out against the petition movement were informed by Government officials that unless the demands of the Government were complied with by their husbands they would serve the full period of their sentence. Pressure was brought to bear upon these ladies and special facilities were given them to visit the gaol, avowedly in order to bring about the desired end.