Two of these gentlemen, weakly desirous of popularity, gave way to the general outcry and suspended all claim licenses to natives by a proclamation issued on July 24th, which contained a reservation certainly, (which may be taken for what it is worth) allowing the issue of such licenses on production from the various digger committees of certificates of character and fitness; but this was a prerogative they were little likely to exercise owing to the strong feeling then existing. John Cyprian Thompson, to whom I allude elsewhere, the dissentient, a good lawyer and a thorough Englishman, did not compromise himself by joining in this most illiberal proclamation. The subsequent action of Sir Henry Barkly tended to prove the correctness of Mr. Thompson’s opinion, for as soon as the proclamation reached Capetown his excellency canceled it by another of Aug. 10th, 1872. In this he stated that “as it is inconsistent with justice that persons against whom no specific charges have been brought should be deprived of their rights and properties, I do hereby revoke, cancel, and make void the said proclamation, and do declare that the same shall be of no force or effect whatever, and that all licenses suspended under and by virtue thereof shall be returned and the holders thereof placed, as far as possible, in the same position as if the said proclamation had not been issued.” The question of granting licenses to natives, and other matters of the same kind, then attracted little attention from government until some time after Governor Southey’s arrival, when the due constitution of our own legislative council having taken place, an ordinance was passed (No. 21 of 1874) dealing more strictly with licensed dealers and brokers. Dealers’ licenses were increased, at the suggestion of certain of them who thought by this means to monopolize the trade, to £50 and brokers’ to £25 per annum; dealers were obliged to buy in licensed offices, and brokers could not get a license without a magistrate’s certificate, proving that they were not under tutelage, and producing two sureties. By another short Act (No. 31 of 1874) diamond dealers were compelled, under a penalty of £50 or in default three months’ imprisonment, to properly register and record all their purchases. Again, while Sir J. D. Barry was acting administrator, another ordinance was passed (No. 4 of 1877) repealing 21 and 31 of 1874, re-enacting the main clauses but increasing the maximum punishment for a first offense to a fine of £500 and three years’ imprisonment, and for a second to £1,000 and seven years.