A difference of opinion existed from the first as to the necessity of the Zulu war, and with reference to the character of Cetywayo. This became much more pronounced after the disaster at Isandhlwana. It is a significant fact that a very small minority of those who knew the Zulus and lived in Natal shared the sentiments of the British philanthropists, who lived securely at home, and took upon themselves to condemn a policy with the reasons for which they were only imperfectly acquainted. The Bishop of Natal, Dr. Colenso, was, in South Africa, the leader of the party who denounced the war. In the Blue Books laid before Parliament interesting letters from his able pen are published, in which he argues the Zulu case exactly as if the race were a civilized one, which could be expected to observe treaties, and with whom perfidy and deceit were unknown. In a despatch from Sir Bartle Frere, written from Pretoria, in the Transvaal, and dated the 18th of April, the High Commissioner sums up the arguments for war. These reasons utterly and completely exclude any feeling or desire for vengeance, and all intention to advance civilization, commerce, and Christianity by the sword. It was absolutely necessary, however, that the Zulu king should cease to reign, the military power of that nation be broken up, and his people made to feel themselves subject to the British power. Sir Bartle Frere says:— "I believe that this is in the interests of the Zulus, no less than of their neighbours. "It is in the interest of the European population of Natal and the Transvaal, because they cannot possibly live in peace and quiet with the Zulus in their present state as neighbours. "The events of the last few months have rendered it unnecessary to prove by argument that the Zulus have been made into a great military power; that they can destroy an English regiment, with artillery to support it; or shut up or defeat a brigade six times as strong as the ordinary garrison of Natal, unless our troops are very carefully posted and very well handled. "The open declarations of their king, no less than the fundamental laws of their organization, proclaim foreign conquest and bloodshed as a necessity of their existence. "They are practically surrounded by British territory. Except the Portuguese, there is now no foreign territory they can reach for purposes of bloodshed without passing through British territory. "It is, therefore, clear that they cannot continue in their present condition, with their present form of government and present military organization, without attacking British subjects, or, at best, unoffending neighbours, who believe themselves safe as British subjects or allies. "They make no prisoners save, occasionally, young women and half-grown children. They show no quarter, and give no chance to the wounded or disabled, disembowelling them at once. [Sidenote: _Sir Bartle Frere's views._]