No equality under the Union Jack, 1900-1910

Gumede’s hopes that the British victory in the Anglo-Boer war would result in the removal of the oppressive features of White rule in Natal, in particular the Pass Laws, were unfulfilled. Africans were looking for outlets to voice their objection against their pressing position. The political revival was particularly evident among Natal’s mission-educated Africans, Kholwas, many who had moved away from the influence of the chieftaincy. The political awakening of the Kholwas manifested itself in the development of European-type organisations and independent churches. The first European-style African organisation to emerge in Natal was the unamalungelo (literally “we seek our rights”) Society headed by John Kumalo in 1888.

Gumede was an active member of this organisation. This movement strove to encourage the Africans to “attain the highest state of civilisation”. Unfortunately Funamalungelo was plagued by internal strife and personality clashes and consequently failed to develop into a strong political movement.

Gumede, Martin Luthuli and other Black leaders in Natal identified the urgent need for a new organisation. Not surprisingly, they turned to Harriette Colenso for guidance in their new political venture. A liberal of rare intellectual gifts, Harriette’s constant battle against colonial prejudice towards the Africans won her the respect of African leaders like John Dube, Martin Luthuli, Saul Msane and Gumede. Harriette regarded the limitations in African administration in Natal and Zululand as a violation of British justice. This explains why she devoted her literary skills to expose the British of attempts to destroy the material basis of the African people. A retrospective view of Harriette’s political activities suggests that whilst her gender was probably a disadvantage to her when dealing with the Whites in Natal on the one hand, it may well have been an advantage to her in winning the confidence of African leaders. In Natal Harriette found herself the object of contempt at the hands of Colonial officials, having to bear crude insults directed at her association with the African people. Her compassion for African suffering won her the respect of Africans in Natal. There can be no doubt that Harriette contributed significantly to the moulding of Gumede’s political philosophy.

Under the guidance of Harriette Colenso the Natal Native Congress (hereinafter NNC) was officially inaugurated on 8 June 1900. Unfortunately, Gumede was unable to attend this inaugural meeting. His involvement in the Anglo-Boer War prevented him from attending. The Natal Mercury reported that many delegates could not attend on account of the war. The main aims of the Congress were to cultivate a political awareness amongst Africans by educating them about their rights under the prevailing system of government and laws, and, most importantly, to act as a forum for airing grievances. The second meeting was held at Pietermaritzburg on 3 August 1900. An important resolution which was adopted stated that: “The time has arrived when we should have our own representatives in the Parliament of Natal”. Needless to say the Colonial Office in Britain and White politicians in Natal were alarmed at these demands of the NNC. Alfred Milner, High Commissioner to South Africa, justified the ostponement of political rights to Africans on the grounds of racial incompetence. Milner regarded Africans as “children, needing and appreciating a just paternal government rather than the incongruous political rights demanded for them by ignorant Philanthropists at home”. Milner’s idea as to how the Africans should be governed was endorsed by the Natal Redistribution Commission in 1903. This commission held the view that “not only are Africans not fit to be represented in the Legislature of Natal, but should not have any representation whatever”. Rejecting the political demands of the NNC, White Colonial Officials maintained that they knew what was best for the African masses: namely, to be taught the virtue of regular manual labour and the paying of their taxes.

The virtues of socio-economic and political upliftment and emancipation were excluded from their governance of the Africans. Aware that Britain had tacitly surrendered her moral responsibilities and abandoned her self-assumed role as the protector of the Blacks at Vereeniging, leaders like Gumede began to speak out against the shortcomings in the Administration of African Affairs. The Editor of Izwi La Kiticalled on his readers to agitate for political rights. “Representation, not necessarily direct, we must have in some shape or form as taxpayers”.

GUMEDE AND THE SOUTH AFRICAN NATIVE AFFAIRS COMMISSION, 1903-05

The mission of the SA Native Affairs Commission (hereinafter SANAC) under Godfrey Lagden is well-known and needs no repetition. Politically-conscious Africans not only welcomed the opportunity to give evidence before the SANAC, but it also renewed their political expectations:

The SANAC as a whole should give entire satisfaction to our people so far as choice is concerned. It remains to be seen what good the Natives will get as a result of the deliberations.

Although Gumede was not officially called upon to give evidence, he received permission to accompany Simeon Kambule on Wednesday, 4 May 1904. After the Anglo-Boer War, both men had turned to farming in the Klip River/ Ladysmith Division. In his evidence Gumede would focus on a wide range of issues such as the proletarianisation of the African worker, Pass Laws, chieftainship, Zulu traditions, and Shepstonian governance in Natal.

Gumede’s introductory remarks bears pertinently on the sorry economic plight of the African worker in Natal:

The (White) farmers detain the Natives; they have work of their own to perform, and they keep the Natives to perform that work, and they only release them from their employ when the time comes to pay taxes to the Government; and then they only give them from three to four months in which to earn that money. Natives are detained by the Chiefs on the locations, who hold them back in order to be able to supply the requisitions of the Government. Others they release, and they come to the towns, and it is they whom you see in the towns working. The majority of the Natives in the locations are the ones we see employed on the railways, and roads, and by the Harbour Department at Durban.

Clearly the class issue is inscribed into Gumede’s text. Gumede’s evidence reflected on the complex relationship between rural peasantry and the evolution of urban racial capitalism, the uneven proletarianisation of the African through migrancy and unskilled casual labour, and the draconian application of the Pass Laws. The nature of his introduction suggests that Gumede regarded himself as a sympathetic spokesperson for the emerging African proletariat. Turning to the burning issue of the introduction of Chinese Labour, Gumede questioned the Chamber of Mines’s decision.

Arguing that the importation scheme was detrimental to Africans’ economic situation, Gumede stated:

When we see the Chinese being brought into the country, we wonder to what crisis or precipice we are being driven by such action. We find that we are being brought face to face with famine. The White people have brought the Indians into the country, who earn money, and take it away with them, and they are making the land poor. Now they are bringing similar people to the Indians. But we are here, and we disperse the money amongst our White people with whom we are living.

Gumede’s statements are redolent of racism. Yet one has to see it in relationship to the effects of colonialism, and particularly apitalism. Hirson argues that racism stems, inter alia, from the competitiveness introduced at the workplace by apitalists and government, in which the drive to keep wages down led to a divide-and-rule situation. Thus Gumede gave vent to the threat which the African proletariat faced, namely that of unemployment and low wages. While rejecting the importation scheme, Gumede pointed out that one possible solution to the pressing labour problem lay in the improvement and maintenance of standard wage rates. Gumede maintained that a reasonable wage (2-3 shillings per day) along with humane treatment would bring workers in great numbers to the mines.

Turning to the political level, in particular the Natal Code of Native Law, Gumede’s views differed sharply from that of Simon Kambule. Gumede affirmed his support for the retention of African customary law.94 While Kambule desired to have the chiefs removed from their positions and pensioned, Gumede argued that many Africans did not want to see an abrupt end to their traditional leadership. He claimed that many Africans looked in most cases to their chiefs for protection and guidance, hence many had not reached the stage“ where they want to be brought under the ordinary law of the Natal colony”. On a question from S. Samuelson as to why he, as a well educated man, “and perhaps better educated that most of those who are exempted”, had not applied for exemption from African customary law,

Gumede replied as follows:I do not wish to be separated from my people. I do not wish education to separate me from those with whom I am living.96

Why was Gumede reluctant to cross the cultural line leaving his traditions and customs behind? One possible answer to this question is to be found in Gumede’s belief in and sympathy with Zulu traditions and values. Gumede’s evidence clearly points to the growing identity crises many Kholwas had been experiencing. I will return to this issue shortly. Jordan Ngubane has pointed out that the non-Christian tribesmen wanted to lead their own life, segregated from those who had gone over to the side of the White man. Non-Christian tribesmen wanted nobody to intrude into their closed society, hence they had no time for the Kholwas and viewed them with suspicion. Fortunately for Gumede, his chief Ncwadi maintained good relations with Missionary Zundel of the Berlin Missionary Society. Consequently Gumede could move easily between the world of his traditional Zulu society and that of the Christian mission.

In his further evidence Gumede also spelled out major weaknesses in the Natal Code of Native Law: I wish to complain against the law, which is said to be Native law, but which is in reality not native law. My reason for doing so is this. The chiefs are no longer chiefs, but gentlemen. There is only one chief who rules all of us, and that is His Majesty the King. The government gives those chiefs, who are really no longer chiefs, powers which are the cause of many disputes. Gumede claimed that in many instances the sons (Dinizulu) of the hereditary chiefs were thrust aside and that outsiders of low repute, who had really no right to any position, were taken and placed in charge of some communities. He argued that the appointed chiefs should simply remain Government indunas or social heads and be given the full powers attached to those positions (indunas). Government indunas, he argued, should however not be given the powers of hereditary chiefs, one of which was to try Native cases. Gumede defended his preference for: “the old law as applied to chiefs, which was when a chief submitted to another one, he no longer retained the status of a chief, but simply lapsed into a gentleman”. Gumede added that“ chiefs should not be treated with differentiation”. Clearly, Gumede had raised the issue of chieftainship as a direct reference to the chaos in Zululand wrought about by Wolseley’s post-war settlement and as a cause of agitation for Dinizulu.100 Gumede’s concern was that the Zulu royal family might gradually fade into insignificance. By the turn of the century, Zulu society was no longer what it had been during the time of the old Zulu kingdom.

Approximately 400 000 Zulus continued to live under some 200 chiefs. Dinizulu himself was no longer recognised as king but employed as a government induna, receiving an annual stipend of 500 pounds. Gumede’s objections against the rigid application of Natal’s Code of Native Law were well-founded. None other than William Beaumont, Judge of the Supreme Court of Natal, acknowledged Gumede viewpoints. “In Natal you are undermining the authority of the Chiefs every day. Every act dealing with Natives that is passed more or less undermines the authority of the Chiefs, and, on the other hand, you are trying to bolster them up to retain their position”. Thus Gumede’s hope of British justice and fair play had been blighted as a result of the antipathy of certain Colonial Officials. Like Beaumont, R. Samuelson, humanitarian and author, accused the Natal government of “sheer neglect” of the safeguarding and advancement African interests.

“There might as well be no SNA”, wrote Samuelson, “as allow the present state of things”. Similarly Gumede condemned the Government Officials’ reluctance to give the Africans what they desired - the security and prosperity implicit in just and effective British rule. Scrutinising Gumede’s evidence not only gives us an insight into the internal stresses of Natal’s African society, but also the fears and anxiety of an individual caught up between two different worlds. Like Dube, Soga, et al., Gumede at certain stages of his life would have to choose between his enthusiasm for the history and traditions of his people, and his admiration for Christianity and civilization. What Williams has said about Soga, was equally true for Gumede, namely that “Black society should be purged of all that was obnoxious to Christian morality, but not at the expense of intrinsic institutions and values which gave it cohesion and security”. Quite logically, those at whom Gumede’s evidence was directed, were not only the British and Natal governments, but also the mining houses at the Rand. Gumede’s message to the mining sector was clear - they should guarantee an increase in the wages and protection of the African against foreign indentured (Chinese) workers. Gumede’s appeal was essentially aimed at “sympathetic” African governance from the British and Natal governments. He resented the Government officials’ manipulation of African affairs.

To Gumede, Africans’ obligation to accept the authority of the Natal government depended upon the extent to which the latter was prepared to remove unjust and discriminatory regulations and by-laws. The Natal administrators, while informed of African grievances, shut its ears to Gumede’s appeals for redress. On the contrary, in his evidence to the SANAC, Moor, former SNA, applauded their system of African administration as almost blameless. The gulf between the white administrators and their African subjects gradually widened with frightening consequences. For Gumede the subsequent report of the SANAC in 1905 offered few, if any, hopes of reform or modification of the existing discriminatory racial laws. The report set the pattern for future South African racial policies by recommending, inter alia, rigid territorial segregation and a separate and unequal form of representation for Africans in the colonial legislatures. Many of the socioeconomic grievances which Gumede had raised were left unaddressed. To add insult to Africans’ economic and political injuries, the Natal parliament passed the African Poll Tax Act in August 1905. The imposition of the poll tax of one pound, coming as it did soon after the report of the SANAC caused great resentment among the Africans in Natal. African discontent which Gumede had highlighted to the SANAC soon developed into an open rebellion when Bambatha, a minor chief of the Greytown district, defied the White tax-collectors.

There were rumours that Bambatha had held talks with Dinizulu in Zululand and that the latter had encouraged Bambatha to rebel. However the Bambatha Rebellion was crushed by the Natal colonial troops in August 1906. How did Gumede respond to the Bambatha Rebellion? Gumede’s role in 1906 was of an ambiguous nature. Like the majority of his NNC colleagues, Gumede at this stage of his life, did not support the rebellion as a means of calling attention to Africans’ economic plight. To demonstrate their loyalty to the Government the majority of Kholwas paid their Poll Tax. Even Dinizulu apparently ignored continued pleas from the dissidents urging him to throw his weight on their side. There is no evidence to suggest that he seriously contemplated such a step.

Gumede’s evidence before the SANAC in 1904 prompts me to argue that although he was in sympathy with the motives that provoked the Rebellion, hoping that their grievances would be considered by the Government afterwards, he looked to peaceful methods to advance the African cause. Gumede preferred not to alienate support from missionary and liberal circles as a result of mass action. However when the inevitable happened and Dinizulu was finally arrested and charged with high treason, Harriette and Gumede engaged British members of Parliament like Keir Hardie, humanitarians like Dr Charles Garnett, and Sylvester Williams, a Trinidadian lawyer, to intervene against Dinizulu’s prosecution.The Rebellion paved the way for the revival of African politics. His visit to London in 1907 offered Gumede an ideal opportunity to lay Africans’ grievances at the feet of the Colonial Office

GUMEDE AND THE SOTHO CHIEFS’ DEPUTATION TO ENGLAND IN 1907

“ Unfit and improper to be exempted from the operation of Native Law”

By 1905 Josiah and Margareth had established themselves as one of Rookdale’s foremost families. Gumede and Margareth had expanded their family to four girls and one son after the birth of Margareth Hilda (born 1901), Harriette Emily (born 1904), and Edward (born 5 May 1905). Eager to avoid his children suffering from the malpractices of Native Law in Natal, Josiah and Margareth decided to place their eldest two girls in a school in the Cape Colony. In August 1905 Gumede accompanied Edith and Sarah to the Eastern Cape. Meanwhile Gumede’s mother was still living in the eastern Cape. Her health was deteriorating. In 1905 Gumede took up a position as a land agent with the firm of Thackeray Allison and Albert Hime solicitors. It was a position he was to hold for the next fourteen years. Having to travel considerably in the execution of not only his work but also to visit to his serious ill mother, his two dauthers and his sisters in Queenstown in the Cape Colony, Gumede petitioned the Governor Henry McCallum that he be exempted from the operation of Native Law. Gumede’s application particulars give us some idea of his material status.

His immovable and movable properties well exceeded the 50 pounds requirement under law 28 of 1865. His movable property included 25 cattle, 5 horses, 30 goats, 1 Scotchcart and 1 carriage. Having resided in Natal for more than 16 years, he retained access to sizeable landholdings. His brother, William, who himself was exempted from Native Law, served as witness. G Bolton Jones, District Surgeon issued Josiah a certificate “testifying that the latter is a fit and proper person to receive Letters of Exemption from Native Law”. Gumede soon discovered that it was in the Governor and his Executive Council’s discretion to grant or refuse any application. After a three months delay, his application was turned down, despite the comment raised in 1904 by S. Samuelson, namely that Gumede was “better educated than most of those who are exempted”. No reason for the failure of his application was given.

Undoubtedly Gumede’s involvement with the struggle of the African scouts to secure their silver war medals may well be a reason for Governor McCallum’s harsh decision. Gumede re-applied for exemption the following year, but he was again unsuccessful. In September 1908, G.W. Willis, lawyer, on behalf of JT, appealed to the SNA for an excempted Pass Certificate in terms of Rules of 2 June 1904 no6, but without success. Back in the Orange River Colony , Gumede’s principal mission was to investigate the land claims of two Sotho tribes, namely the Bakhulukwe and Batlokoa in the new Orange River Colony (hereinafter ORC). Since many of the tribesmen had served under Gumede in the Anglo Boer War, he was well-informed about their case. In their subsequent legal struggle, in the drawing up of their petitions and in travelling to England, Gumede would play a significant role. At the time, their case was given wide coverage in the South African and British newspapers. The case was characterised by a remarkable exchange of substantial official correspondence between the Colonial Office, the South African High Commission in Pretoria, the Native Affairs Department in the ORC and the League of Universal Brotherhood in England. Gumede was widely referred to.

To begin with, the British victory in the Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902 fuelled the hopes of the chiefs and followers of these two tribes that they would be allowed to return and settle on their original lands. In 1905 Gumede and the chiefs petitioned Sir Hamilton Goold-Adams, the Lieutenant-Governor of the ORC, to investigate their cases with a view to securing land which had been dispossessed many years before. The cases of both tribes were spelled out in detail. The Batlokoa tribe was originally part of the Basuto nation who were driven from Basutoland in about 1858 by the chief Moshesh. The major portion of the tribe went northward into the Transvaal, and some went to the Bechuanaland Protectorate. A portion broke away and and settled in the Free State. About a year before the Boer-Basuto war (1866) some moved to the Mill River Valley in the Harrismith district.

The Bakhulukwe were a Hlubi tribe who had been driven away from Zululand by Shaka. A large number also settled in the Free State at Witzieshoek. In 1866 Commandant C. de Villiers, who was then in charge of the Harrismith district and a member of the Volksraad, requested the tribes to assist the Free State Government in the war against Moshesh. In return, De Villiers promised them that the land -pproximately 2130 square miles - which they were occupying would be secured for them.

After the war, the tribe purchased this land for three thousand cattle. However in 1888 the tribe, after having received notice to leave the land, were forcibly evicted without any compensation. The case of the Batlokoa tribe was almost identical to that of the Bakhulukwe. They had also rendered service to the Free State in the war against Moshesh in return for the land on which they were residing. After the war their late head chief, Letika, had paid four thousand cattle for the land situated in the Vrede and Harrismith Districts. Like the Bakhulukwe, they were ordered in 1882 to evacuate their land.

The petitions contained some 53 affidavits (3 from Europeans), which Gumede and G. Willis, a lawyer from Ladysmith, had personally compiled. Sir Hamilton was also “begged to relieve them of the law of 1893 of the Orange Free State, which was re-enacted by the new Government as an ordinance, whereby no more than five native families are allowed to live on one farm”. The reply of Goold-Adams came as a rude shock to Gumede and the leaders. Goold-Adams pointed out that:

  • (1) “The Government had decided not to allow communal tenure amongst natives;
  • (2) irrespective of that decision, all the land in the area claimed by the tribes being occupied, it was impossible for the Government to grant their request to be settled as a tribe on a piece of land in that neighbourhood;
  • (3) the Government would undertake to settle all the natives of the tribes concerned on farms held by White farmers in other districts, and would put them as near one another as possible, in order that they might hold almost daily intercourse, should they desire so to do, and that each of them would have his little patch on the farm on which he was settled, which he would be at liberty to cultivate for himself;
  • (4) that every native so settled by the Government would receive pay instead of other forms of remuneration, if he expressed his desire to that effect”. Gumede and the leaders of the tribes were not prepared to accept Goold- Adams’s reply and having exhausted all means at their disposal in South Africa for obtaining redress for their case, they decided to proceed to England to“ petition the King for a grant of a specific location”. It is unclear who the prime mover of this request was. The fact is that a deputation of Indians from the Transvaal has travelled to England in 1906 with a similar petition. Dickson felt that the tribes would only be wasting their money. Dickson however, advised them to cable their intention to England. The deputation consisted of three chiefs, Lesisa, Moloi, and Lequila, and Gumede, who acted as the interpreter and counsellor.

They were armed with a ninety-five page petition. Preparations for the trip were completed in less than a month. All the members had to obtain permission to travel to England. The deputation raised more than two thousand pounds to cover their mission’s expense. It is remarkable that they succeeded in raising this amount in the short space of time, especially at a time when cash was very scarce. It is also an indication of the degree of support that they received from their followers for their cause. Gumede was about to take a major step towards political prominence. It is interesting to note that F.Z. Peregrino, Gold Coast born editor of the South African Spectator, in Cape Town alerted the authorities in Pretoria about the whereabouts of Gumede. Peregrino goes on to describe Gumede“to be of a mischievous disposition”. Prompted into action by Peregrino, the Secretary for Native Affairs in Pretoria demanded a full report from G. Adamson, magistate of the Bergville Division on the political movements of Gumede. Adamson report reveal some interesting insights. As for Gumede’s peronal affairs, he frequently visited his mother in the Cape Colony and brought some of his sisters back to Bergville. Dwelling on political affairs, Adamson claims to have been suspicious of Gumede for a long time. According to him, Gumede is seldom at home and his movements are `enveloped in mystery’. “I therefore gave instructions to the Pass clerk to refuse to issue asses to Gumede without previous reference to me”. Following Adamson’s report the Minister of Native Affairs acted swiftly.

He tried to salvage the deputation by informing the Secretary of State for the Colonies “that Gumede has left South Africa without authority”. The deputation left Cape Town on 10 December 1906 and arrived in England at the beginning of January 1907. The fact that they had never been to sea before would have deterred many, but the chiefs were determined to proceed and press their cause to the heart of the British body politic. Chief Lequila told the Daily Express that he had been told that he would die on the voyage, “but he did not care ... it was the last chance for my tribe”. That Gumede had already travelled to England with the Zulu Choir in 1892 must have been a calming factor. The voyage was not without setbacks. Chief Lequila, who claimed to be more than eighty years old, contracted influenza and could not attend the first meetings. While the Colonial Office was indifferent to their petition, the delegates enjoyed the support of influential persons and organisations abroad. They were received and welcomed by Henry Sylvester Williams, a well-known London barrister born in Trinidad who had visited South Africa in 1903. Another person who would establish close contact with the group was Dr. Evans Darby, the Secretary of the League of Universal Brotherhood (hereinafter LUB). From the beginning, the deputation had received most favourable coverage in the English newspapers. A journalist of the South Africa appears to have been the first to conduct an in depth interview with the delegates at 5 Essex Court, in Temple where they were in close consultation with Williams.

The reporter was impressed that: All the members wore European costume and are fine specimens of the Basuto race. They are deeply impressed with the importance of their mission, and discussed it gravely through the very excellent English of Mr Gumede. Gumede explained that their mission in England was “to petition the King and the British nation to allocate us land in our own country, the Orange River Colony, and to give us the right, which is at present denied to us, to purchase land”.“We are now British subjects,” claimed Gumede, “and the question is: shall we remain in a state of servitude, as we were under the Boers, or claim our ordinary rights as British subjects?” We have done all we could in South Africa, and this is our last hope. We will not be discouraged until we hear from his own lips that what we ask is impossible to be granted. Our desire is to settle down, practise Christianity, educate our children, and improve our condition enerally.

Gumede’s speech had carried some influence and was unwelcome news to the Home Government. However, Gumede was unaware that Selborne, the High Commissioner in South Africa, was trying his best to jeopardise their cause. In reply to a telegram of 11 January from Elgin, the Secretary of State, Selborne forwarded a comprehensive description of the case. Selborne argued that the natives have no claim which the ORC Government could possibly admit. Selborne pointed out that the number of farms situated in the area in question had already been assigned to other (European) owners and claimed that “there could have been no intention on the part of the ORC Government to give the tribes any ownership in the land”. He added that he failed to see how Elgin could possibly intervene in their favour. Selborne went on to suggest that the tribes may possibly be granted land within the boundaries of the Bechuanaland Protectorate pending the outcome of a special report from the Resident Commissioner on this matter. Selborne also sounded a warning about Gumede’s political role. He stated that he had been informed by Goold-Adams that Gumede was authorised by the Orange River Colony Native Congress Executive Committee to: “bring the question of a general character affecting the natives of the colony as a whole, to the notice of the Secretary of State”. Selborne claimed that this request was later withdrawn by the Executive Committee. Selborne’s unflattering description of Gumede’s role was clearly a reflection of his irritation at Gumede’s mission. Selborne was convinced that of the delegates, Gumede was the most familiar with the British political scene. Furthermore, Gumede was a vigorous speaker and completely fluent in the use of English.

Behind Selborne’s viewpoints lay much political calculation. Selborne was devoted to bringing about the unification of the South African colonies and would do nothing to jeopardise this ideal. In his Memorandum, he strongly argued the case for union and played carefully on the sentiments of the two former Boer republics. The Selborne Memorandum was directed at the Whites of the four colonies and emphasised that, unless they united, they would not realise their full potential or enjoy the full freedom of self-government. Whether or not this memorandum tied Selborne’s hands, is debatable. One can argue that if he had challenged the decisions of the ORC Legislative Council with regard to the two tribes petition, his actions would certainly have been regarded by the Boer leaders in the ORC as a breach of faith.Selborne was mindful of not embittering relations with the Boers in the ORC and jeopardising his own future prospects. The delegation’s priority was to present their petition to Elgin. Williams, on behalf of the deputation, handed in a statement of their claims.

The statement, “particularly urges the repeal of the old Dutch Ordinance of 1893, which was re-enacted by the British Government in 1903, and which prevents natives from either owning or leasing land”. It is to be expected that the delegates, who had travelled many thousands of sea miles and had valid grievances, were well prepared to defend their case. The deputation were accompanied by E. Pickersgill, MP, P. Wilson, MP, the Rev. G. Wilson, Sylvester Williams, Dr E. Darby, Dr Mackay, Dr Garnett, and Dr Barnes. The interview lasted for almost two hours. Elgin was still awaiting a despatch from Selborne and was very cautious in his reponse. Williams presented the case with great conviction. He stressed that the visitors had acted as scouts for the British forces in the Boer war and emphasised to Elgin that: “these people are British subjects, and that they are therefore entitled to enjoy the elementary privileges of British subjects under the constitution”. “It would only be in keeping with the principles of the Constitution,” argued Williams, “ to allow the scattered members of the two tribes represented by the delegates the right to purchase land to live on in the ORC”. Williams criticised the ORC Government’s Administration of Native Affairs. He pressed upon Elgin the fact that: “there was nothing in the laws of that Colony appertaining to the interests of the natives, and suggested that, if any amendments were to be made to the existing laws, some protection of native interests should be embodied in any amending Ordinance or Act”. South Africa concluded that Elgin accorded the deputation a sympathetic hearing.

Elgin assured the deputation that he had instructed Selborne to investigate their land claims. It had become apparent that Elgin’s promise was essentially an empty gesture - one of the type that the Colonial Office was fond of making. Essentially an administrator rather than a politician, and very much an official mind, Elgin had the reputation of being“ properly cautious in making decisions”. Gumede’s disappointment at the hands of Elgin, was in the making. The LUB was determined to keep the British public informed about the tribes’ cruel treatment at the hands of the ORC Government. Fortunately, the deputation continued to draw the backing of an array of influential dailies which included the London Times and Daily Chronicle. John Bull Over-Seas argued that: “the petition seems a reasonable request, especially as, after all, leave is sought merely to re-occupy, by purchase, lands which were the cradle of their race”.On 19 February 1907 Dr Garnett, ecretary of the LUB, forwarded a resolution of support which was “passed unanimously” by his Congregational Church at Barnsbury, to Elgin.146 The resolution “earnestly hopes that Elgin will make a favourable reply to their petition to be allowed a suitable location and to make it constitutional for them to acquire land”. These newspaper reports were the most potent medium for the instruction of the British public opinion. Undoubtedly, its most important result was that it troubled and prompted the Colonial Office into action. The delegates secured a second meeting at the Colonial Office on 27 February when they met Charles Murray, Colonial Civil Service Official entrusted with South African Affairs.

The interview had been specifically arranged by the Colonial Office “in order to accelerate the return of the delegates”. The outcome of the meeting, whilst not unexpected, was disheartening to the delegates. Murray pointed out that: “these native chiefs were doing no good by remaining in this country, that Lord Elgin had done all he could for them under the circumstances and that it would be much better for them and save them further expense if they returned to their own country”. Murray made it clear that, since there was “no Crown Land at all in the ORC,” Elgin “could not possibly on the eve of Responsible Government force a measure through the ORC Legislative Council whereby Africans would be allowed to buy and own land there”. The deputation was determined not to abandon their petitions. Garnett referred Murray to the 4th paragraph of Elgin’s despatch (No. 46 of 21 December 1906) to Selborne on the status of British Indians in which he expressed his view that they should be allowed to own land on the premises occupied by them. The deputation called on Murray for a similar assurance of Elgin’s sympathy in regard to natives in the ORC. Only then would they advise the visitors to return to South Africa and in the meantime lay their case before Selborne.

Murray warned Williams and Garnett that: “they had better be careful in how far they assured the natives and not to fill them with too much hope as Elgin could promise nothing”. Murray added that: “Garnett would be taking the responsibility of causing unrest and unsettling the minds of these tribes”. The deputation agreed to await Elgin’s address. The delegation’s next step was to seek an interview with the King. Murray responded with a courteous refusal that it was out of the question that they should have a personal interview with the King. On 7 March Churchill, the Under-Secretary of State, informed the League that Elgin has not yet received a full report of the matter from Selborne. However, the Chiefs were glad to learn that Elgin had instructed Selborne to investigate their claims that their tribes had not yet been fully compensated for losses suffered in the war. Elgin had also opted to advise the King about their petitions. In return, Garnett promised Elgin that they were prepared to assist in securing the return of the Chiefs to South Africa as soon as it could be arranged. Elgin’s long awaited address of 25 March came as a shock to Gumede. Elgin “emphatically repudiated the suggestion that the position of members of these tribes living upon private farms in the ORC would be tantamount to slavery”. Elgin’s address was discussed at the annual meeting of the League held at Exeter Hall on 27 March 1907.

Rev W. Darby, the chairman, reacted angrily towards Elgin’s stance and wanted to know: “why the British Government could not do something for the Chiefs, as the ORC was still a Crown Colony, and was directly under the authority of the Home Government”. Williams moved a resolution, which was carried, trusting that Elgin would soon be in a position to advise the King to make what would be considered a satisfactory reply to the Chiefs’ petitions. Gumede used the opportunity to raise the case of Dinizulu’s prosecution in Natal. At the end of the meeting Hardie protested at the manner in which Dinizulu, “a loyal and capable man” was being ill-treated and expressed the hope that: “the Chiefs would not return to South Africa discouraged, but would agitate, even if it led to prison or the gallows”.

The Daily Express accused Hardie of “inciting the Basutos to rebel against Britain” and held him responsible for a possible rebellion. It is possible to exaggerate, but impossible to overlook the impact of Gumede’s three months-campaign in Britain. The main legacy of his British experience must have been the influence of Henry S Williams, who was advancing the principles of Pan-Africanism. Williams held that the struggle of Black people everywhere was inseparable from one another, and it was his mission to develop a sense of unity amongst African, West Indian and Afro- American political organisations, and to strengthen their case in the pursuit of political progress and eventually emancipation. It was a view that Gumede would pursue in the 1920s.

GUMEDE’S ARREST AND TRIAL IN NATAL, 1907

When in May 1907, Elgin was confronted by the League of Universal Brotherhood again, it was for a different reason, namely the arrest of Gumede. Gumede was detained upon his arrival in Natal on 13 May 1907 and charged with contravening the provisions of Rule 3 of the rules framed and published under Law 48, 1884 in that, being a native subject to Native Law, he did, in or about the month of December 1906 wrongfully and unlawfully leaves the Colony of Natal without the pass or permit prescribed by Rule 27 of the said Rules. On application of Sergt Graham, the Prosecutor, Gumede was remaned for 3 days. In his defence, Gumede argued that he had a valid pass issued on the 9 October 1906. When he took out the pass, he did not know that he would be going to England.

His going to England was only decided when he reached Cape Town. Gumede pleaded not guilty but admits that he left Cape Town for England. Adamson found Gumede guilty and sentenced him to pay a fine of ten pounds or in default of payment to be imprisoned for three months with hard labour. Gumede settled the fine. Gumede’s sentence caused an outcry amongst the League’s leadership. Armed with a cablegram from Gumede about his arrest and fine, Williams and Dr. Garnett called at Elgin’s office. Elgin was requested to ascertain “at once the cause for this proceeding”. They appealed to Elgin to have the“ illegal fine” remitted. Furthermore, they pointed out that: “Gumede, who rendered invaluable service to the British as a scout, and is a most judicious, unselfish and law-abiding subject of the King, has now come to be regarded by many people as a bad character,” hence their appeal that the actions of the magistrate should be carefully investigated and properly dealt with.

Elgin did not budge an inch in his opposition to interference in Gumede’s case. In his reply, Churchill informed Williams and Garnett that: “Elgin is unable to review the action of an officer exercising judicial functions in a self-governing colony”. Gumede appealed against the entence. On 25 June 1907 the Native High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and sentence of the magistrate. Gumede, whose self-confidence had been restored by his successful appeal, embarked upon furthering the cause of the two tribes. Two series of developments offered renewed hopes of success. In the first place the visit of Dr Garnett to South Africa at the end of 1908 and secondly Lord Crewe’s succession to Elgin as Secretary of colonies in April 1909. Dr Garnett appealed to Selborne for an interview with the purpose of laying the case of the tribes before him. Meanwhile the ORC had obtained Responsible Government and Garnett was consequently advised by Selborne to approach Sir Hamilton Goold-Adams, the Governor. Unfortunately their meeting turned out to be a complete failure. Having listened to their case, Goold- Adams argued that the two tribes had insufficient evidence against the late Orange Free State government. Gumede’s hopes of restoring to the two tribes what he believed was rightfully theirs, were shattered by Goold-Adams’s stance.

The two tribes’ cause was a political one, and according to Keegan,“ held the relative balance of power between White and Black agriculturalists in a colonial society”. By the early twentieth century, the Whites were irrevocably reserving for themselves the resources of land, labour and capital which the Sotho were attempting to repossess. The Black tribes’ agitation provoked great resentment amongst the White farmers of the Orange River Colony. Some of the White famers took their revenge by evicting from their farms many families of the tribes. In October 1909 Gumede informed Dr Garnett about this growing dilemma: This morning I received from Harrismith a letter with another list of natives that are turned adrift with their large families comprising 398 souls, men, women, and children, and their livestock, in addition to 40 or 50 large families reported to the Governor and to you before this. My informant tells me that he has some more names of large families to send to me.

These poor natives suffer more than can be imagined. May God guide His Majesty King Edward and his Ministers to come to the rescue of these poor human beings and be their saviour. I still believe our good King Edward will do something for us, and that our prayers will be heard. I cannot write much; I feel overwhelmed with pain, sorrow and grief at the treatment meted out to the Bakhulukwes and Batlokoes by the boers in the Orange River Colony. They are told to go to the land they claim. Chief Linta Moloi, who had accompanied Gumede to England, was one of those who had been evicted from the farm of H.W. Wessels, where he had lived since birth. Gumede expressed concern for the plight of Chief Linta “who has abandoned his children, and is wandering about, to find a home for them”.164 Much to the resentment of Goold-Adams and his officials in South Africa, Gumede and Dr Garnett tirelessly pressed the two tribes’ case before the Colonial Office, and in particular the Earl of Crewe, Secretary of State for the Colonies. Acting upon Gumede’s letters, Dr Garnett strongly appealed for the immediate intervention of the British King in order “to save these housands of poor people from ever-increasing misery and degradation of the most cruel kind”.

Both Gumede and Garnett’s attempts to secure immediate relief of the two tribes from the oppressive rule of the Boers in the Orange River Colony were bound to fail. Evidence of this is to be found in the constitutional negotiations for a union of the South African colonies and states which was almost completed at that time. Following the signing of the draft South Africa Act by King Edward in September 1909, the Earl of Crewe was constitutionally bound to endorse Governor Goold-Adams’s decision as regards the two tribes’ right to their own piece of land.166 With Union inevitable, Goold-Adams was about to return to Britain and the case of the two tribes was referred to the Union government. Gumede was not prepared to accept defeat easily. T.J. Allison was hired to petition the Union government to provide reserves for the two tribes. This appeal was also turned down. The Land Act of 1913 would offer the last hope of securing a piece of land for the two tribes.

GUMEDE AND THE FOUNDING OF ILISO LESIZWE ESIMNYAMA, 1907

Besides his mission of the land claims of the two Sotho tribes, Gumede remains actively involved in many other battles to improve the political, social and economic order to which Africans in Natal had been subjected. His mission was to ensure that the Africans’ voice be heard in matters directly affecting their lives. In the absence of true democratic constitutional institutions for Africans in his native country, Gumede’s public life revolved around a new organisation which had been formed in 1907 in the aftermath of the Bambatha Rebellion, Iliso Lesizwe Esimnyama (Eye of the Black Tribe) - an organisation of Wesleyan Methodist converts and chiefs formed in the Dundee and Newcastle area of Natal. In 1908 Gumede, at forty- one, was elected acting secretary of Iliso and co-signed the constitution with Z. Mazuku. One of Iliso’s first meetings was called to protest at the regulations hindering Africans from purchasing Crown lands. The main aims of Iliso were to unite the people of Natal-Zululand into a contented, prosperous people; to bring about harmony and mutual cooperation between the people of Natal-Zululand; and to advance the general prosperity and progress of the country and people who found themselves in a deplorable condition. The Natal’s Colonial officials’ indifference towards negotiations with African leaders served as an important stimulus in heightening Gumede’s political awareness. When, on the threshold of the first session of the National Convention, the Natal Government under Prime Minister Moor passed new legislation which they claimed was “for the better administration of Native Affairs”, both the NNC and Iliso protested that it was in reality, a step towards white domination of African affairs.

The new legislation entrusted the administration of African affairs to a permanently appointed Secretary for Native Affairs, granting him almost dictatorial powers. Ever since Theophilus Shepstone had left that portfolio, his successors seldom had African aspirations and grievances at heart. Shortly after the publication of the three bills in April 1908, IIliso met to discuss their opposition to the new legislation. Gumede was nominated to participate in the deputation of 74 which met Premier Moor to protest against the new legislation. Their meeting was adjourned until 10-11 June 1908 when the number of the African deputation had swelled to . It is unclear whether Gumede was part of the special fifteen-man committee appointed by the NNC formed specifically to handle the opposition to the Moor legislation. Gumede’s name however appeared on most of the petitions which had been presented to the Natal authorities. In the battle against the three bills Gumede acted as one of Iliso’s spokespersons. Commenting on the new African legislation in the local press, Gumede objected that it “had been forced against the protest and prayers of the Africans”. Gumede maintained that: In Natal nearly all rights and privileges are for White men alone and not to be enjoyed by the natives. Laws are made upon some unfavourable disposition towards the native. Civilization and Christianity could not allow such laws to exist. We desire to return to the Crown Government if we could find an opportunity to do so. Further provisions of the Act, declare that any African who defies or shows disrespect to the Secretary for Native Affairs or any other proper officer, was liable to imprisonment or fine without jury trial. “Would the Whites be satisfied”, asked Gumede, “to be ruled by such a law?” Gumede was hopeful that it might still be possible to persuade Moor to change Natal’s African policy.

Not surprisingly Moor evaded Gumede’s letter of protest. There is little doubt that Gumede’s agitation was treated with deep suspicion by the Natal authorities. Evidence for this statement is based on the controversy which developed after John Dube had used the words “Vukani Bantu”, meaning “Rise up you people!” in 1904. Dube was summoned before the Governor and given a severe reprimand. Dube consequently offered an apology in his newspaper. Gumede was more courageous than Dube. The Moor government knew that Gumede had raised legitimate grievances. For the Natal government, which was the host of the the first session of the National Convention to be held at Durban, the immediate issue was securing White supremacy. The question of African political upliftment as raised by African leaders such as Gumede was left in abeyance until Union was inaugurated. Undoubtedly the unjust African policy of the Natal government made a lasting impact on Gumede.

CONCLUSION

During the period under discussing Gumede emerged as an elected representative of the African voice. A dominant theme of the chapter is the complex relationship between Gumede and chieftaincy. The presence of ambivalence in his attitude towards chieftancy is obvious. On the one hand, JT remained intimately engaged in the struggles and plights of tribal leaders like Dinizulu and the chiefs of the two Sotho tribes. Truely, the chiefs regarded Gumede as their main spokesperson to further their respectives courses. On the other hand, Gumede also gave definition to the new social and political needs of educated Christian Africans, many of whom had moved away from the influence of their chiefs and preferred to be ruled as British subjects. Gumede appeared to move with ease between both cultural worlds. For Gumede the post-war era represented a crucial time with the Natal government reluctant to remove the shackles, in particular the curfews and Pass Laws, which enslaved Africans. Gumede, clearly aspiring to political leadership, tried to confront, use and challenge various offices of power, both in South Africa and abroad to safeguard Africans’ political and socio-economic interests. As has been shown, his sacrifices bore little, if any, fruit. Government officials favoured a system of governance that preserved and perpetuated Whites’ dominant political and economic position at the top of the pyramid. Against this background, South Africa, a country of great natural beauty, remained a country of ugly conflict during the first half of the twentieth century.