Imperialism in South Africa

by J. Ewing Ritchie

“The Transvaal,” wrote one who knew South Africa well—the late Mr. Thomas Baines—“will yet command the admiration of the world for the perseverance, the primitive manliness and hardihood of its pioneers.” As a proof of advancing prosperity, when he was there in 1860 its one-pound notes had risen in value till four were taken for a sovereign, and several hundred pounds’ worth had been called in and publicly burnt upon the market-place. It is a proof of the simplicity of the people that on that occasion the Boers and Doppers (adult Baptists) crowded wrathfully around, and bitterly commented on the wastefulness of their Government in wickedly destroying so much of the money of their Republic; while others, of more advanced views, discussed the means of raising them still further in value, and sagely remarked that because they had been printed in Holland the English would not take them, but that if others were printed in London they would certainly be as good as a Bank of England note. In the Volksraad (House of Commons) now and then some amusing scenes occurred. The progressive party wanted, one day, to pass some measure for the opening and improvement of the country, when the opponents, finding themselves in a minority, thought to put the drag on by bringing forward an old law that all members should be attired in black cloth suits and white neckerchiefs. This had the immediate effect of disqualifying so many that the business of the House could not be legally conducted; but an English member who lived next door, slipped out, donned his Sunday best, with a collar and tie worthy of a Christy Minstrel, and resumed his sitting with an army that completely dismayed the anti-progressionists. The latest authority, Sir Arthur Cunynghame, testifies to this simplicity as still the characteristic of the Dutch. “Some little time before our arrival,” he writes, “a German conjurer had visited this distant little village, when the Doppers were so alarmed at his tricks that they left the room in which he was exhibiting, and, assembling in prayer, entreated to be relieved of the devil who had come amongst them.” He tells the story of a Jew, who in dealing with a Boer had made a miscalculation, which the Boer pointed out, appealing to his ready-reckoner. Not in the least taken aback, the Israelite replied, “Oh, this is a ready-reckoner of last year!” and the poor Boer was done. A further illustration of their simplicity is to be found in the fact that when they trekked from the Cape they fancied that they were on their way to Egypt, and, having reached in the Transvaal a considerable river which falls into the Limpopo, thought they were there, and called it the Nyl—a name which it still retains. In accordance with their serious teaching, they gave Scriptural names to their settlements and villages; and if they were severe on the natives, and ruled them with a rod of iron, did not the Jews act in a similar manner to the Hivites and the Hittites, and did not Samuel command Saul to hew Agag in pieces before the Lord?

It is to be feared that the Boers have never had justice done to them by our rulers. We had no claim on them. It was to escape British rule that they, with their wives and children, their men-servants and maid-servants, their oxen, and their sheep, their horses and their asses, went forth into the wilderness. Even Mr. Trollope admits that when they took possession of Natal, “there was hardly a native to be seen, the country having been desolated by the King of the Zulus. It was the very place for the Dutch, fertile without interference, and with space for every one.” There they would have settled, as did the Pilgrim Fathers on the other side of the Atlantic, and built up a flourishing State, but we followed them, and drove them away. If they had been allowed to remain, the English Government and the English people would have been saved a good deal of trouble. At any rate, we should never have heard of the native difficulty in Natal—the difficulty which keeps away the emigration required to develop the resources of a country happily situated in many respects; the difficulty which must ever be felt by a handful of English in the presence of a horde of polygamous and untutored savages who will not work, and who, alas! are not ashamed to beg. Natal, had the Dutch been left peaceably in possession of it, would have been by this time the home of a God-fearing, civilised community, instead of swarming with Pagans who have fled there from the cruelties of their native kings, and who learn to treat their protectors with insolent contempt. In Natal, the English shopkeeper has to speak to his customers in their own language. Where the Boers hold sway it is otherwise. In the Dutch parts of the Cape Colony, Captain Aylward writes: “The coloured people are tame, submissive, and industrious, speaking the language of their instructors and natural masters. As I proceeded further on my journey through the Transvaal,” continues the same writer, “I saw in various directions gardens, fruitful orchards, and small, square houses in the possession of blacks, who were living in a condition of ordinary propriety, having abandoned polygamy and other horrid customs resulting from it. So great an improvement I had not noticed during any part of my previous residence in Natal.” It is a pity that we have made the Boers our enemies; and the worst of it is, in their determination not to be English the women, according to Captain Aylward, have been a wonderful aid to the men. They have suffered for that spirit. It has called them from the homesteads built by their fathers, the rich lands where the grapes clustered and the sheep fattened, and the fields were white for the harvest. In 1841 Major Charteris wrote: “The spirit of dislike to English rule was remarkably dominant among the women. Many of those who had formerly lived in affluence but were now in comparative want, and subject to all the inconveniences accompanying the insecure state in which they were existing, having lost, moreover, their husbands and brothers by the savage, still rejected with scorn the idea of returning to the colony. If any of the men began to drop or lose courage they urged them on to fresh exertions, and kept alive the spirit of resistance within them.” Sir Arthur Cunynghame has nothing but praise for the Boers. On his way to the Diamond Fields he stopped at Hanover, which, he says, “has a grand appearance, the Dutch minister’s house, standing in the centre, being quite a palace. It was built by the subscriptions of his parishioners. The honours which the Dutch lavish on the ministry are worthy of remark.” Equally worthy of remark is their hospitality and their piety. The farmer gives his guest the best entertainment he can provide, and “before the family retires to rest the large Bible is opened and the chapter appropriate to the day is read.” On another occasion, Sir Arthur’s party encamp near the residence of a rich Dutch farmer, who refused admission to his house and would not even sell them an egg; yet he records the fact that, “late in the evening the sounds of the Evening Hymn floated over the plain, the nasal twang of the patriarch being distinctly heard leading the choir, while female voices, with their plaintive notes, chimed in. It is pleasant,” adds Sir Arthur, “to hear in these lone lands such evidence of a religions sentiment pervading the community, and it is an assurance that the people are contented and happy.” Sir Arthur writes:—“There are no finer young men in the world than the young Dutch Boers, who are generally of immense height and size, and very hardy. Their life is spent in the open air by day, and frequently at night they sleep on the veldt, with no tent or covering. Men more fit for the Grenadier Guards, as to personal appearance, could not be found. Some of them are plucky. A Boer had part of his hand blown off by the bursting of his gun. Having no doctor near, he directed his son to bring his hammer and chisel, and shape off his fingers.” As an Irishman, Captain Aylward is enthusiastic as regards the personal charms of the ladies. Many of the elder ones even, he admits, are not uncomely, and in the wild neighbourhood of Lydenberg itself, he tells us, are to be seen some bearing traces of beauty of no ordinary character, whose lives, he says, somewhat unnecessarily, are useful, adorning, and cheering the homes of their husbands and children. These people are somewhat unlettered, and very phlegmatic. “They do not wish,” writes Sir Arthur Cunynghame, “to move ten miles from their own door, nor to see one who comes from ten miles beyond it.” Their moral discipline also seems somewhat severe. “In the little fort,” writes Captain Aylward, “was an English storekeeper, named Glynn, whose daughters had a piano, on which they would occasionally play dance and other profane music. This was a source of great annoyance to their pious neighbours, who, in many respects, resembled our early Puritans. It was requested that the piano should be silenced, as the music might tempt the anger of Heaven if persisted in during a time of war and trial. If a girl in the laager were frivolous or light in her conduct, she was liable to be arrested, and brought for trial before the Fathers of the Church, from whom she might receive a severe caution, or even the punishment of removal.” At Lydenberg, at the time of Sir Arthur’s visit, an altercation had taken place on the unrighteousness of dancing, for which a party was tried by the Synod; but an appeal was made to the Court, and this appeal formed an important epoch in the history of the town. To show how primitive these Boers are, let us take the following story:—A schoolmaster was lately appointed in Zoutspanberg. One of his earliest lessons was to teach the children that the world turned upon its own axis. He also endeavoured to make them understand the revolutions of the heavenly bodies. The children went home, and were impertinent to their parents, and told them that the earth went round the sun. The elders of the district met, and consulted regarding these new doctrines, and finally agreed to refer the subject to the minister, who requested the schoolmaster to explain. The schoolmaster said, “I teach them nothing but the movements of the heavenly bodies, and that the earth revolves round the sun.” The minister answered, “Well, this may be true, no doubt, and what the earth does in Holland; but it would be more convenient at present if in the Zoutspanberg you would allow the sun still to go round the earth for a few years longer. We do not like sudden changes in such matters.” The schoolmaster took the hint, and the sun continued to go round the earth as usual. The power of the minister of a parish is very great. A great deal depends upon him for the improvement and well-being of the town. Many a time it was said to Sir Arthur, when he observed that a town was flourishing, “Yes, we are fortunate in our minister;” and when it was falling back it was, “Ah! all will alter when we get rid of our present minister.”

It is to the credit of these people that they have a consistent native policy. No faith is to be held with Rome. “Delenda est Carthago” is their motto. They leave the natives to quarrel among themselves, while our English policy has been to play off one petty savage chief against another, and to arm and strengthen the natives with whom we are ultimately to fight. The natives see through this, and argue, as Sir Arthur Cunynghame testifies, that the English fear them, else why, they ask, do they give them such high wages? or why do the Government allow them to buy arms? It is some such feeling that has urged on Cetewayo into his present hostile attitude. He considered that we were his allies against the Boers, and thought we annexed the Transvaal for him and his savage followers. Up to the annexation he and the English were on friendly terms. It seems that the Boers are reluctant to fight for English rule, and some of the colonial papers hint that they are a danger and a menace. No wonder, as we have always sacrificed them to the natives. The Free States newspaper complains that “our British neighbours have established at the Diamond Fields free trade in guns and ammunition, in spite of all treaties with the Republic, and even in spite of their own professed policy in the Cape Colony. Griqualand West permits the supply of guns and ammunition to the natives—Zulus and Basutos—without hindrance, whilst Earl Carnarvon requests all South Africa to meet in a friendly conference, because of the native question and Zulu difficulty. British traders supply Her Majesty’s enemies, and our enemies too, with guns and ammunition to any extent, in order that these enemies may be better prepared to fight us when the next struggle may commence; and, worst of all, British commerce, represented by colonial shopkeepers and merchants, who, to fill their own pockets, would not for a moment hesitate to bring ruin on the colonial farmers and Republican Boers, cry out that it is preposterous to stop the trade in guns.” Assuredly, the Boers may well complain of the Imperial policy in South Africa. There is little to be said for our dealings with them after they had removed out of our rule. That we had no right to annex the Diamond Fields, the sum we offered in compensation may be considered as fair evidence; and the annexation of the Transvaal, besides being a crime, was a blunder for which we are now paying dearly in person and in purse. It has bean shown that the cry for annexation raised was merely “an ignorant expression of the dissatisfaction of a mean and contemptible minority”—a set of greedy speculators and disreputable office-seekers, who grossly deceived the English officials, who were not naturally averse to the power and prestige a new command would give them. The Republic was not insolvent, nor was it unable to hold its own. In the war with the Basutos, contrary to the assertion of Mr. Trollope, the Burghers were everywhere victorious, nor was it stained with slavery, as, if so, when Sir Theophilus Shepstone annexed it, we should have heard of a wholesale emancipation; nor was the step taken by the will of the people. The only argument for the step was that we were obliged to take it in order to prevent our own house catching fire, and the result has been the conflagration we were so anxious to avoid. Sir Theophilus Shepstone annexed the Transvaal, and our house caught fire in the Cape Colony, and in Griqualand West, and Secocoeni broke out; and, lastly, we have the tragedy of Isandula. We shall never be safe till we have the Transvaal, argued Sir Theophilus Shepstone and his friends. Now, argue the latter, that we have the Transvaal, we are bound to go to war. This reasoning was irresistible to Lord Chelmsford, who, in a despatch dated September last, says, “So long as Natal and the Transvaal had separate interests, the policy of the chief of the Zulu nation was to play off the former against the latter. . . . With the annexation of the Transvaal this state of things virtually came to an end.”

Ex uno disce omnes. One example will suffice of the way in which that theory of dominion universal, from, the Cape to the Zambesi, which appears to dominate over the official Englishman, when he has anything to do with Africa, acts in a mischievous manner, may be seen in the case of Griqualand East, formerly called No Man’s Land, which was some years since a sort of neutral territory. In time the Griquas, or bastards, settled there. They were an industrious people, and far more advanced in civilisation than any other native tribe. They had large flocks of cattle and sheep, and were wealthy, with good furniture and houses, and prospered under the rule of their President, Adam Kok. Many new buildings, such as churches and schools, were being erected when Sir Arthur Cunynghame visited them, and many new stores put up. He writes: “In the afternoon we attended the native service carried on in the Dutch language. It was impossible for me to follow it; in fact, the discovery that the sermon related to the Prodigal Son formed the limit of my knowledge of what was going on. The congregation appeared attentive, and the clergyman in earnest.” Not long after the visit, it was decided by the British that they should annex the country, and Adam Kok was pensioned off with a thousand a year, which he did not, however, long enjoy, as he was soon killed by a carriage accident. At a meeting of the people on the subject, Captain Adam Kok complained, as, indeed, he had every reason to do, of the hasty and arbitrary manner in which Government were assuming authority in his country. They had their own cannon, fire-arms, and ammunition, bought with their own money, and after being left for thirteen years entirely to their own resources, without any preliminary notice he said, the Cape Government stepped coolly in and took possession of them and their property. When the Government laid out the Kat River Settlement of Hottentots, they gave the settlers seed, corn, ploughs, and various other things to help them. But the Griquas were not so treated. They had to do everything for themselves, and we were bound to regard them not as enemies to be put down, but as friendly allies to be encouraged and preserved.

How long is this system to be pursued? The Transvaal is getting into a worse state every day. It has vast resources which cannot be developed. It is importing flour, when it might be a great corn-producing country. It has no manufactures, and its exports are few. Captain Aylward writes: “The Boer party complain bitterly of the annexation. They say our liberties have been unnecessarily taken from us, and our country annexed, not only against the will of the majority, but in utter defiance of Lord Carnarvon’s instructions, which state that no such proclamation shall be issued by you (Sir Theophilus Shepstone), unless you shall be certain that the inhabitants, or a sufficient number of them, or the Legislature, desire to become our subjects.” The Boers also object to the annexation, because they believe that the arguments put forward by Sir Theophilus Shepstone are not borne out by facts, and they are still more angry because they believe the annexation was brought about by false pretences, accompanied and strengthened by attacks made upon their honour and character by a party Press interested in their destruction. They say further, that the terms of the Annexation Proclamation have not been adhered to, and this party, undoubtedly the strongest in the country, appeals to England to do them justice and restore to them their country. The railway party who want a connection with the natural outlet of the Transvaal, Delagoa Bay, are discontented, and so are the very men who were the first to applaud annexation. As it is, it seems, the Transvaal must end either in anarchy or martial law, and will be a heavy burden on the British taxpayer for many years to come. Mr. Trollops himself admits that it is not easy to justify what we have done in the Transvaal. “If there be,” he writes, “any laws of right and wrong, by which nations should govern themselves in their dealings with other nations, it is hard to find the law in conformity with which that act was done.” And Mr. Trollope is right. Undoubtedly it was an act of injustice of which we have not yet seen the bitter end. There is little chance of that injustice being undone. The Dutch are poor and far away. It is the old, old story of the wolf and the lamb over again. We have made so little of South Africa, we might leave the Boers alone. All that we can say against them is that when it was the fashion for West Indian planters to maltreat their slaves, they often did the same.

The Boers are becoming more discontented, as well they may, and there is no sign of this discontent ceasing. In the beginning of February they held a large meeting at Wonderfontein to receive the report of the visit of the deputation, Messrs. Kruger and Joubert, to Europe. The latter is reported to have said:—“My brethren and fellow-countrymen,—I am very glad to see you all spared by God in this our beloved country. I wish and hope the best, also, with regard to your families. You have deputed us on a mission of the utmost importance to yourselves. I know you are awaiting our report with deep anxiety. I know your feelings and your wishes—aye, I share your anxiety, and, therefore, I will not detain you long by words. Know, then, that I cannot report to you so favourably as you had expected that the all-powerful British Empire had acknowledged your rights so that you may, as had been said by Joshua to Caleb, be strong and possess the country which God has given you. No, brethren, England has annexed your country, and will keep it, and I may not mislead you by not telling you that you cannot stop the superior power of England. Therefore, take heed for yourselves, and don’t do anything of which you may repent for ever, and which may plunge yourselves, your families, and others into deeper misery still. Pray to God for wisdom; be prudent, and act wisely. Who knows, God may help us and grant relief. You had sent us to ask back your independence. What we have done for it you already know from the newspapers, and the rest you will learn from the books or pamphlets which we had printed. In how far you will decide that we have done our duty we leave to you. I do not care for myself, but I do for the country, and the people, and where I feel my own shortcomings and weakness, I am satisfied before God and my conscience that I, if I have not obtained what you, what I, and the people have desired, I have done for it what I could. And with this I wish God’s greatest blessing for yourselves and the country.” Other speeches were delivered of a more angry and exciting character. It was intimated that we got our Empire by robbery. Mr. W. Pretorious said the High Commissioner promised much, but all he wanted was to get back his independence. Said another speaker, amidst enthusiastic cheers, England might annex and oppress them, but it could never give them an English heart. Some resolutions were moved, of which the following was one:—“The committee, supported by the people, cannot be satisfied with the reply of the English Minister, Sir Michael Hicks Beach, and resolve to continue to protest against the injustice committed, and, further, to devise ways and means with the people for attaining their object.” After the meeting, some people having torn to pieces the printed copies of Sir Bartle Frere’s letter, Mr. Joubert strongly condemned the stupid proceedings, and requested the people to act wisely and with judgment. On the Sunday religious services were held, and on Monday a further meeting took place. Ultimately it was resolved, “That the committee, having learned the opinion of the people expressed in their memorials, and the expressed wish of the people not to submit to British supremacy, but to abide by the protest of April 11, 1877, proposes to the committee a deputation to acquaint Sir Bartle Frere therewith, and at the same time to assure His Excellency of their full co-operation for the advancement of the whole of South Africa, provided the annexation be rescinded.” Clearly, when we have settled with Cetewayo, we shall have a little trouble with the free people of the Transvaal. According to the Natal Mercury, we had better leave them alone.

The following, says the Natal Witness, is a translation of the oath of mutual allegiance taken by a great number of respectable Transvaal Boers at the Wonderfontein meeting. It will strike most people that this oath is the oath of men who are to be respected. It will also strike them that such men are likely to secure the sympathy of the great bulk of the English nation:—“In the presence of Almighty God, the Searcher of hearts, and praying for His gracious assistance and mercy, we, burghers of the South African Republic, have solemnly agreed, for us and for our children, to unite in a holy covenant, which we confirm with a solemn oath. It is now forty years ago since our fathers left the Cape Colony to become a free and independent people. These forty years were forty years of sorrow and suffering. We have founded Natal, the Orange Free State, and the South African Republic, and three times has the English Government trampled on our liberty. And our flag, baptized with the blood and tears of our fathers, has been pulled down. As by a thief in the night has our free Republic been stolen from us. We cannot suffer this and we may not. It is the will of God that the unity of our fathers and the love to our children should oblige us to deliver unto our children, unblemished, the heritage of our fathers. It is for this reason that we here unite, and give each other the hand as men and brethren, solemnly promising to be faithful to our country and people, and looking unto God, to work together unto death for the restoration of the liberty of our Republic. So truly help us, God Almighty.”

Till Sir Bartle Frere appeared upon the scene at the Cape men ridiculed the idea of another Kaffir war. Now all is changed. The following is an extract from a letter, dated February 12, received by a gentleman in London from a well-known merchant at the Cape:—“Who is responsible for the fearful loss of life which has taken place in Zululand? This is now the question of all questions; but we fear that it will drop out of sight, as the iniquitous proceedings perpetrated here during the late so-called war have done. The Zulus will, of course, be crushed, as ‘Might is Right’ seems now to be England’s motto. Sir Bartle Frere and Lord Chelmsford must answer for the part they have played, and for the consequences of the tragedy they have caused. Never was there a greater mistake than the Frere-Sprigg native policy. We have not right on our side, and we have not the force to carry it out, even if we had. We have made enemies of the loyal Gaikas, of the Basutos, of the Fingoes, of the Zulus, and of every other tribe in South Africa, by our harsh and unjust treatment of them. The appointment of Sir Bartle Frere as Governor, and of Mr. Sprigg and his party to power, are the greatest misfortunes which have befallen this country for fifty years.”

The South African correspondent of the Daily News, writing from Maritzburg, March 2, says:—“It is now only too evident to every one that Sir Bartle Frere’s policy has been most mischievous in its effects upon South African interests. More has been done since he landed at Capetown, two years ago, to produce discord and unsettlement than, it is to be feared, can be undone for many years to come. Friendly tribes have been exasperated; colonists have been ridden over rough-shod, and now it would seem that the High Commissioner is bent on bringing about the last and final evil, by engaging in a war of conquest with the Transvaal Boers. There is a strong and increasing feeling throughout South Africa that the annexation of the Transvaal must be reversed. When that act took place it met with very wide approval, for two reasons—first, because it was believed that the majority of the Boers were consenting parties; and next, because it was believed that the act might tend to bring the two great European nationalities closer together. The return of the second Transvaal deputation has brought to light the fact that the majority of the Boers were by no means consenting parties. They complain, too, and justly, that not one of the promises made at the time of the annexation has been fulfilled. If the acts of the annexation were repealed, and time allowed for the bitter feelings engendered by it to subside, there is little doubt that the Boers would be found willing to come into some sort of confederation with the other South African States, and there can be no doubt that if the Transvaal came in willingly the Free State, whose capital, Bloemfontein, is regarded by many as the natural capital of South Africa, would come in also.”

What is to be the end of our system of annexation in South Africa? Our Consuls far away from the healthy criticism of the English Press, and possibly better trained in ancient than modern history, dream imperial dreams, and the public at home applauds when a magnificent success crowns their work. In the case of Sir Bartle Frere there has been a failure, and he will have to pay the penalty; while demagogues who, like the Irishman who when landed in America, and asked for his vote for the opposition candidate, immediately promised it, remarking he was “again all Government,” see in the failure the hand of Earl Beaconsfield, and hold him up to scorn and contempt. It is clear what has been done at the Cape is only in accordance with the whole past of colonial rule, not merely there, but in every quarter of the globe. We could not leave the Boers alone, who stood as buffers between us and the surrounding savages. We must follow them over desert and plain and swamp and river and rock and bush. The colonist reaped, at any rate, a benefit from such a policy, for he made profitable contracts for his waggons and horses, and there was a refreshing stream of English gold, which otherwise would have been dried up. The Book of Nature might say, Leave the Boers and the savages alone; but to a highly-cultured people the Book of Nature is a blank, and the passions and prejudices, and fears and hopes, of the passing hour are the only considerations by which the public and the puppets it places in office are moved. Some of us still talk of the New Testament; but he who were to quote it, even after Mr. Speaker had said the prayers, in our High Court of Parliament, as bearing in any way on national policy, would be as much laughed at as Dr. Kenealy or Major O’Gorman. Meanwhile time will solve the problem—the storm will blow over. The mob and the pictorial papers will glorify the returning heroes who have crushed a savage who was mad enough to defy on his own behalf and on that of his people the British power, and the British public will have to pay the bill—not, unfortunately, the hard-working, over-taxed working man; he is a myth, as much so as a mermaid or a griffin; but that large middle-class, on whom the tax-gatherer instinctively preys; who have been shorn so often that it has become to them a second nature; who have been the mainstay of the country, but who are fast becoming, under the weight of Imperial taxation for Imperial schemes, an extinct race.