Chapter II The Grim Struggle between Right and Wrong, and the Latter Carries the Day

Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness

which they have prescribed;

To turn aside the needy from judgment, and to take away the fruit

from the poor of my people, that widows may be their prey,

and that they may rob the fatherless.

Isaiah.

On February 18, 1913, General L. Lemmer, member for Marico, Transvaal, asked the Minister of Lands: — (a) How many farms or portions of farms in the Transvaal Province have during the last three years been registered in the names of Natives; (b) what is the extent of the land so registered; and (c) how much was paid for it?

The Minister of Lands replied: (a) 78 farms; (b) 144,416 morgen; and (c) 94,907 Pounds.

Some very disturbing elements suggest themselves in this question and in its prompt answer. A question of the kind should have taken some time to reach Pretoria from the seat of Parliament; more time to search for and compile the necessary information, and further time to get the answer to the Table of the House of Assembly in Capetown. For instance, on March 11 Mr. T. L. Schreiner called for an explanation in connexion with the same return. He had to ask again on April 1, the answer in each instance being that the required "information had been telegraphed for and would be laid on the table when it is available" (vide Union Hansard, pp. 777 and 1,175). It was only on May 13 — two months and two days after — that an answer to Mr. Schreiner's question of March 11 could be furnished.

Again, on May 20 Mr. Schreiner called for a similar return, embracing the four Provinces of the Union.* If it were so easy for General Lemmer to get a reply in regard to the Transvaal, where most of the registration took place, it should have been relatively more easy to add the information from the Cape and Natal, since no registration could have taken place in the Orange "Free" State, where Natives cannot buy land. But strange to say, all that Mr. Schreiner could get out of the Minister was a promise to furnish a reply when it is available, and it does not appear to be on record that it was ever furnished during that session. Therefore, a Native cannot be blamed for suspecting that when General Lemmer asked his question, the return was "cut and dried" and available to be laid on the table as soon as it was called for.

— * It does not appear to have occurred to any one to call for a return showing transfers of land from blacks to whites. —

Another significant point is that the questioner did not want to know the extent of land bought by Natives, but of the land "registered in their names" during the period; and Mr. Schreiner was able to show later in the session by an analysis of the return that it mainly comprised land awarded to Native tribes by the Republican Government, some of it when they conquered the country. They include farms bought or awarded to Natives as long ago as the early 60's and 70's, but the owners were not able to obtain titles as the late Republican Government did not allow Natives to register land in their own names. They had been held in trust for them by European friends or missionaries, and it was only during the last three years that the owners claimed direct titles, which right was restored to them since the British occupation.

But the Lemmer Return did its fell work. It scared every white man in the country. They got alarmed to hear that Natives had during the past three (!) years "bought" land to the extent of 50,000 morgen per annum.

Thanks to Mr. Schreiner's questions, however, the misleading features of the statistical scarecrow were revealed — but, unfortunately too late.

Origin of the Trouble

On February 28, 1913, Mr. J. G. Keyter (a "Free" State member) moved: That the Government be requested to submit to the House DURING THE PRESENT SESSION a general Pass and Squatters Bill to prohibit coloured people (1) from WANDERING ABOUT WITHOUT A PROPER PASS; (2) from SQUATTING ON FARMS; and (3) from SOWING ON THE SHARE SYSTEM.

Mr. T. P. Brain,* another "Free" Stater, seconded the motion.

— * This gentleman died during 1913. —

Mr. P. G. W. Grobler,* a Transvaaler, moved (as an amendment) to add at the end of the motion: "and further TO TAKE EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO RESTRICT THE PURCHASE AND LEASE OF LAND BY NATIVES."

— * Mr. Grobler forfeited his seat when he was convicted of complicity in the recent rebellion. —

Mr. Schreiner strongly protested against both the motion and the amendment.

The Minister for Native Affairs* spoke somewhat against Mr. Keyter's motion but promised to comply with Mr. Grobler's amendment, which promise he redeemed by introducing a Natives' Land Bill.

* Hon. J. W. Sauer, Minister of Native Affairs, died a month after the Bill

became law.

Before the Bill was introduced, the Minister made the unprecedented announcement that the Governor-General had given his assurance that the Royal Assent would not be withheld from the Natives' Land Bill. Section 65 of the South African Constitution provides that the King may disallow an Act of Parliament within twelve months after the Governor-General signed it. And the abrogation of the Constitution, as far as this Bill is concerned, literally gave licence to the political libertines of South Africa; as, being thus freed from all legislative restraint, they wasted no further time listening to such trifles as reason and argument.

The following are extracts from the debates on the Natives' Land Bill as reported in the Union Hansard of 1913.

== The adjourned debate on the motion for the second reading of the Natives Land Bill was resumed by

MR. J. X. MERRIMAN (Victoria West). It was with very great reluctance (the right hon. gentleman said) that he rose to speak on this measure. It would have been more convenient to have given a silent vote, but he felt, and he was afraid, that after many years of devoted attention to this question of the native policy of South Africa, he would not be doing his duty if he did not give this House — for what it was worth — the result of his experience through these years.

He should like to emphasize a brighter side of the question, and that was to point out that the Natives, if they were well managed, were an invaluable asset to the people of this country.(Hear, hear.) Let them take our trade figures and compare them with the trade figures of the other large British Dominions.Our figures were surprising when measured by the white population, but if they took the richest Dominion that there was under the British Crown outside South Africa, and took the trade value of those figures per head of the white population, and multiply those figures by our European population, then they might very well apply any balance they had to our native population, and then they would see, strangely enough, that upon that basis it worked out that the actual trade of three Natives was worth about that of one white man.That, of course, was a very imperfect way of looking at the value of these people, because the trade value of some of these Natives was far greater than the trade value of some of our white people.He had merely indicated these trade figures to show what an enormous asset we had in the Natives in that respect.

Let them think what the industry of the Natives had done for us.Who had built our railways, who had dug our mines, and developed this country as far as it was developed?Who had been the actual manual worker who had done that?The Native: the coloured races of this country.We must never forget that we owed them a debt in that respect — a debt not often acknowledged by what we did for them.Proceeding, he said that they ought to think what they owed to the docility of the Natives, and the wonderfully easy way in which they had been governed when treated properly.He also paid a tribute to the honesty of the Natives.

What must strike any one was the fact that though this Bill was really, to a certain extent, a beginning, or was thought to be in certain quarters, of a revolution in their dealing with the native races, it was not even mentioned in the speech of the Governor-General.It fell upon them like a bolt from the blue.He remembered the afternoon.They had heard a very impassioned and very heated speech from the hon.member for Ficksburg on the enormous danger of squatting in the Free State, and that was the occasion for introducing a general statement of the policy of the Government towards the Natives and the introduction of this Bill.He did not think that that was the way they liked to see a thing of this magnitude approached.They often heard demands for what was called a general declaration of policy with regard to native affairs — a policy which should be applied to the highest civilized Native, the owner of a farm, and the naked barbarian.They could not do it.People who demanded a general declaration of that kind had not had the experience which some of them had had.The hon.member who spoke before him said that he was in favour of the underlying principle of the Bill.

What was the underlying principle?The underlying principle was what one read into the Bill.One hon.member read into it that it was the separation of the two races.That might have been done when the two races first came in contact at the Fish River, but it could not be done now.Since then they had been developing the country with the labour of these people.They had been advancing by our aid.They had mixed themselves up with these people in an inextricable fashion and then some said "Haul your native policy out of the drawer and begin with a policy of separation." He was sure that the hon.member who had brought in the Bill had no idea of that sort in his mind.Another person had the idea that they were going to set up a sort of pale — a sort of kraal in which they were going to drive these people.Then another gentleman sneered at the policy hitherto adopted, and he said that one side said that the policy towards the Natives should be firm and just, while the other side said that it should be just and firm.

It seemed to him that they had not got sufficient information.Beyond the bald statistics which were given by the Minister in the course of his interesting and moderate speech, they had nothing.They were going into a thing that would stir South Africa from end to end, and which affected hundreds of thousands of both races.They had no information as to what were the ideas of the Natives.It was unfortunate that, owing to this lack of information, wrong ideas had got about with regard to this Bill.It was difficult to find out what the Native thought about these things; he doubted whether anybody could say that he had got at the mind of the Native.The only way, and he must say that he did not take it as a real indication, was what they wrote in their newspapers.He was alarmed, but not surprised, at some of the articles in their newspapers, because they took their views from the heated speeches and writings in party newspapers all over the country, and they were very much alarmed.He thought that before a Bill of this sort was passed, there should be some attempt made to get their views.

As far as one section was concerned, the Bill was going to set up a sort of pale — that there was going to be a sort of kraal in which all the Natives were to be driven, and they were to be left to develop on their own lines.To allow them to go on their own lines was merely to drive them back into barbarism; their own lines meant barbarous lines; their own lines were cruel lines.All along they had been bringing them away from their own lines.It reminded him of what an English writer said about a similar policy in Ireland, because when the English went to Ireland they regarded the Native Irish in the way some extreme people here regarded the Natives of South Africa.They thought they would root them out.They treated them as dogs, and thought that they were dogs.They set up a pale.They set the Irish within that pale, to develop upon their own lines, but there were always Englishmen living in that pale, just as in the same way they found Europeans living among Natives.Sir George Davis in describing this policy wrote that it was the intention of the Government to set up a separation between English and Irish, intending in time that the English should root out the Irish.

If they changed the Irish for Natives they would see how the illustration would apply.A policy more foredoomed to failure in South Africa could not be initiated.It was a policy that would keep South Africa back, perhaps for ever.(Hear, hear.) What would be the effect of driving these civilized Natives back into reserves?At the present time, every civilized man — if they treated him properly — every civilized man was becoming an owner of land outside native reserve, and therefore he was an asset of strength to the country.He was a loyalist.He was not going to risk losing his property.He was on the side of the European.If they drove these people back into reserve they became our bitterest enemies.Therefore, he viewed anything that tended that way with the gravest suspicion.Again, in this Bill there was not sufficient distinction between those Natives who tried to educate themselves and the ordinary raw barbarian.They were all classed under the word "Native".

He came now to what was the main object of the Bill, and that was: to do away with the squatting evil.Why was there a squatting evil?Was it the fault of the Native?(An hon.member: No.) Was it the fault of the law?(No.) They had got the most stringent laws concerning Natives of all the laws in the whole country, in the Province of which his hon.friend (Mr.Keyter) was a member.He did not think anything was more surprising than when they came to look at the increases in the native population in the Orange Free State.They had a huge native population in the Cape, and the increase during the census periods from 1904 to 1911 — he wanted hon.members to pay some attention to this, because it showed the value of legislation — the increase in the Cape Province during that period was 8.33 per cent.In Natal, which had a huge — in fact, an overwhelming — native population, curiously enough, the increase was the same, even to the actual decimal figure, viz., 8.33 per cent.: but some allowance must be made, because a large number of Natives were out at work in the mines.

Now, in the Transvaal — and in taking the Transvaal figures these did not apply as regarded squatting, because the increase was mainly due to the number of Natives employed in the mines.In the Transvaal the Natives increased by 30.1 per cent.Now, when they came to his friend's little State, where the most stringent laws were made to keep out the Natives, how much did they suppose the Natives increased in the Free State?By no less than 44 per cent.(Opposition cheers.) Was that the fault of the Natives?No, it was because — having the most stringent laws — the people found it best to evade those laws.(Hear, hear.) He hoped his hon.friend would be a little tolerant.Do let him pick the mote out of his own eye before he tried to pick the beam out of other people's.(Hear, hear.) In the Free State these laws were very severe; for instance, punishments — amazing punishments — were given, and yet the result was the increase in five years by 44 per cent.of their native population.This was something that they should take a warning by.They were going to do away with the squatter in appearance, but he would still survive as a labour tenant.

They might do away with the labour tenant, and he would still be surviving as a labour servant.How was the Government to distinguish between these?They had in the Cape a law which stated how many labour tenants a man should have upon his farm.

What they wanted in this country was administration and not more legislation, and if they were to put the laws which they had into force in the Free State at the present time he had no doubt that there would be a rebellion. (Hear, hear.) They would have platforms swarming with people who would say that they could not grow one bag of mealies without the Natives. But they had the laws to do it. Now they went and tried in this Bill to make a uniform law. Turning towards the Minister, Mr. Merriman said: "My poor friend! that after all the years we had laboured together he of all people should be the author of a uniform law on native matters! (Laughter.) I say this more in sorrow than in anger — (laughter) — because the conditions were totally different in the four Provinces."

In the Free State, proceeded Mr. Merriman, the people had most excellent laws from their point of view for keeping out the Natives — stringent, Draconian, and violent laws, but they were not carried out, and the Natives had flooded the country. All they wanted to do was to turn the Native from a tenant to a labour tenant, and then salvation would be at hand. He could not see very much difference between the two, except that one was a contented advancing man and the other a discontented man approaching very closely to the Russian serf — he was a soul. Shortly we should hear of a farm being up for sale with so many souls.

In the Transvaal the problem had been complicated by the decisions of the Court and the curious way in which some ground had been given out in the Zoutpansberg district, where, he was told, farms had been given out on which the Natives had been living for years, and these farms — with the Natives on them — had come into the possession of companies and individuals, and now it was proposed to turn the Natives off. That would not be an agreeable thing, but he would not offer an opinion now as to the justice of it.

He would like to revert to the state of things which had grown up under the Draconian laws of the Free State.According to a very interesting Blue-book containing reports of magistrates, one magistrate had reported that "the pernicious system of squatting was detrimental to the working farmer, the Native reaping the whole of the benefit." The man who worked generally reaped the whole benefit in the long run.In the Harrismith district there were some 40,000 Natives against some 8,000 Europeans.How did they get there?Having been a Free State burgher he knew that the Natives had not forced their way in.These Natives ploughed on the half-shares, and he would like to know whether they were labour tenants or squatters.If they were squatters it would require very little dexterous management to convert them into labour tenants.The Magistrate of Hoopstad, went on Mr.Merriman, had referred to the pernicious system of native squatters.But why did not the Free State magistrates do something and put the law in force?

That was the principal reason why the House was forced to pass that Bill without information, and without giving any opportunity to people who had the deepest interest in this matter to have their views heard, or to let them know what the House was going to do because the magistrates in the Free State would not enforce the law.He did think that was rather hard.In conclusion Mr.Merriman said: I dare say I may have said a great many things which may be distasteful to my hon.friends, but I do claim their attention because at a time when they were not in such a dominant position as they are now, I pleaded for right and justice for them.Therefore, they should not take it amiss from me, because now they are in a dominant position, I plead also for justice, toleration, moderation, and delay in this matter.