His attitude of allowing people to come and see him began at length to assume a character more or less criminal. Instead of the messengers coming to pay their respects, in order to discuss various matters appertaining to their tribes, they, one and all, came to consult him about a particular matter, and one having reference to a law already enacted. This law, moreover, had received the sanction of the representative of that Government which, as we have seen, was party to the agreement under which Dinuzulu was restored to the country. In no case did he report to the Magistrate, the Commissioner, or the Governor that these visits were being made, and that his advice was being solicited as to what action should be taken. We have seen the form of reply to those who came about the poll tax. As regards the pig-and-white-fowl-killing rumour, he said: "Such order did not emanate from me; I know nothing whatever about it."
Judging from his antecedents and his conduct during the period immediately before the Rebellion, we cannot come to any other conclusion than that his decision to pay was actuated, not by a natural desire to comply with the law, but rather because afraid, his social rank being what it was, that the first attention of the Government would be directed to himself, when he might, before he knew where he was, find that a casus belli had arisen between him and people whom his father's entire army had been unable to withstand. It is, therefore, not surprising that he should have paid, and that his people paid four months before they need have done, in order to escape the prescribed penalty. Just as his compliance did not arise out of a natural desire to obey (any more than, at that time, there was such disposition on the part of hundreds of thousands of other Natives in Natal and Zululand), so it cannot be said that his object was to parade before other Chiefs his approval of the new and strongly-resented law. He was never tired of referring to, and, at his trial, never ceased to quote, his action in being among the first to pay the tax and claiming greater credit therefor than he actually deserved. His compliance was undoubtedly a satisfactory feature, but the act should not be considered except in connection with the general political situation and his own to a large extent underhand conduct at that time and afterwards.
In or about 1903, Chiefs living outside Zululand and north of the Pongolo sent messengers to complain to him of being taxed £3 per hut in the Transvaal, whereas only 14s. was being paid in Natal. The Governor later on spoke to Dinuzulu about this, asking why he had interfered. It was bad enough to exercise influence over Chiefs in Natal and Zululand, but a far more serious matter to do so in regard to those of a different administration. He replied that he had reported the incident to his Magistrate, when he received orders not to concern himself with the matter. These orders, he added, were obeyed. He pressed the Governor to produce the informant, but as this could not be done, he felt aggrieved that an insinuation of his having done wrong was allowed to drop, although informed that his explanation was satisfactory.
This accusation, in conjunction with the further allegations that he and his tribe were in possession of unregistered firearms obtained at Dhleke and Holkrantz, were the origin of a definite application by him that a full inquiry into his conduct should be held. The application was repeated on various occasions, but the Government was unable to comply. At the same time, the Governor strongly supported him in connection with the Holkrantz affair, and told him he had done so.
In consequence of evidence given at various courts-martial tending to implicate him in the Rebellion, the Government had no alternative but to decide to hold some form of inquiry. A difficulty arose as to the composition of the proposed Commission. In the meantime, an investigation had been started by the Magistrate, Mahlabatini, into the circumstances attending his predecessor's murder. The evidence therein, too, was found to some extent to implicate Dinuzulu. Under all the circumstances, Ministers, in November, 1906, resolved to refrain from holding an inquiry until a prima facie charge could be established against him, as the effect of any inquiry being abortive would have been greatly to increase his prestige.
The desire for inquiry was again referred to by the Chief in May, 1907, when, with his indunas, he paid Sir Henry McCallum a visit at Pietermaritzburg. By this time, however, the Government was in possession of a good deal of other reliable information tending to prove that he was personally concerned in the Rebellion, especially by harbouring rebels, including the ringleaders, at Usutu, well knowing warrants were out for their arrest, and either inspiring, or being privy to, various murders of Native loyalists that had taken place in Zululand.
Shortly after Dinuzulu's return to Usutu, the murder of Sitshitshili occurred, followed by the escape from Usutu of Bambata's wife and children.
After fully considering the situation, the new Governor (Sir Matthew Nathan) "reluctantly came to the conclusion ... that Ministers are right in view that the peace of the Colony requires the removal of Dinuzulu from Zululand."[340] He concurred in the advice that Dinuzulu should be required to attend an inquiry into "the present state of affairs in Zululand and into his alleged connection with last year's Rebellion." He also agreed with the proposal that two companies of Imperial troops should be stationed at Eshowe, to discourage breaches of the peace and reassure loyalists more than was possible for a detachment of Militia to do. Representations were made accordingly to the Secretary of State by cable. The latter replied on the 14th October that His Majesty's Government would no doubt be "prepared to concur in the policy of enquiry, and, if necessary, to move the troops as desired, if the enquiry is to be into the best means of securing the peace of the country, including the redress of grievances and if the Natal Government will pledge itself to do its best, in consultation with His Majesty's Government, to carry out the reforms recommended by the Commission [Native Affairs]. Such enquiry might be based on Dinuzulu's own request ... [and] be an important open enquiry ... not a mere police enquiry...."[341] Dinuzulu, in the meantime, nervous on account of the police patrol that had passed Usutu on the 30th September, contemplated leaving Usutu to live in a still more isolated quarter by the Black Umfolozi and nearer the sea.
Shortly after receipt of the Secretary of State's message (14th October), another Chief, Mpumela, was murdered by being shot after dark when sitting in his own hut—again was the murder commonly associated with Usutu kraal, not, in the first instance, by Europeans, but by Natives. Ministers now advised that a warrant of arrest should forthwith be issued against Dinuzulu and a strong body of Militia be sent to reinforce the Police when executing it. The Imperial Government abode by the policy, quoted above, with the result that the two companies of infantry applied for were not sent as requested. Had this comparatively minor point been conceded, it is probable that the murder of the loyal Chief, Mpumela, not to refer to attempts to murder others, would not have occurred. It is not surprising that, under the circumstances, the Colony decided to effect Dinuzulu's arrest with its own troops, without further appeal for Imperial assistance.
Having seen how Dinuzulu's desire for a public inquiry became, through gradual denouement, transformed into a decision to arrest him on a charge of high treason, we will now pass on to consider other aspects of the case.