Most of the criticism in question came as usual from a few noisy people in England, who quite forgot the absurdly few casualties that were sustained by the Imperial troops in the Zulu War, as compared with the number of Zulus who were killed; nor did they remember that Pretorius, at the famous battle of Blood River, had three men wounded (including himself), as against 3,000 Zulus killed. It is one of the ironies of life that persons wholly ignorant, or almost wholly ignorant, of local conditions, succeeded in getting many to attend to and believe their clamour. Such incidents as the cold-blooded attack on the Police at Mpanza were glazed over or forgotten by these zealots, whose chief glory consisted in traducing the motives and actions of their own kin to the best of their ability. Everything the savages did was right, everything that those of their own race did was wrong, wrong, not because of any inherent defect, but wrong just because they are white and not black. All murders, mutilations of corpses, looting, incendiarism and terrorization of loyalists were condoned. It occurred not to these 'judges' to study the facts. If the rebels did anything that wore the appearance of wrong-doing, the act was justified by asserting (wholly regardless of the facts) that the act was but a consequence of the commission of some greater wrong. No act was isolated and considered on its own merits. If Bambata waylaid 150 Police along a difficult road, firing a broadside into a twenty-men advanced guard at a distance of five yards, in the dark, before outbreak of hostility of any kind, the act was justified by the fact that the ringleader had been deposed from his chieftainship by the Government, and because he was but protesting against the imposition of a poll tax of £1 per head. If the reasons why Bambata was deposed, or the circumstances under which the poll tax was levied, had been advanced, other excuses would have been found, and attempts made to justify at every point, with an ardour born of such as had not actually lived in the country and had nothing to lose.
The unbridled resentment and public defiance exhibited at Mapumulo, Umzinto, Nkandhla, Pietermaritzburg and Durban magistracies—at each of which places the Natives vastly outnumbered the civil authorities then present; the audacity of the murders of Hunt and Armstrong; and the still cooler attack at Mpanza,—with isolated, cold-blooded murders, such as Stainbank, Veal, Walters, Powell and Sangreid, accompanied by horrible mutilation (where this was possible),—were all these exhibitions of barbarity to have no effect whatever on the troops, most of whom had been born and bred in the country, and knew the place of the Native in the community?
Natal was being governed in accordance with Native law. Such condition naturally conferred on the higher race a position of privilege and ascendancy, whilst maintaining the Natives in a social system inherited from a far-off past. This eminence had, in the course of two generations, become settled or habitual. The Natives recognized it and had accommodated themselves thereto. When, therefore, the foregoing incidents occurred, they were rightly regarded as serious. This is one of the reasons why the shooting down of the rebels was occasionally as severe as it was, though not on nearly so large a scale as has been supposed.
There remains another and, perhaps, the chief explanation. The spectacle of a subject, lower and uncivilized race rising against its conquerors and lawful masters, with whom it had lived at peace for many years, could not fail to evoke the best energies of the latter to maintain its prestige, though to have to do this in the face of the odds possibly becoming one to ten, demanded the greatest energy, and a drawing on all available resources. It was not a time for half-measures. Rebellion had broken out. Rebellion by subjects, so long in a state of subjection, was expected to be capable of rapidly infecting the entire mass, unless sternly repressed. The possibility of universal massacres of women and children arose before the calmest minds. Such wanton butchery had taken place in the Matabele Rebellion in 1896, the Matabeles being, as is well known, off-shoots of the Zulus. It was a fire that had started, and in a country covered with long, dry grass. If allowed to spread, it would soon have given rise to winds that would have swept it still further along in every direction. Once out of control of their Chiefs, as many were known to have got, others would have followed the example. The best way of pandering to such condition was to have dealt leniently, patiently and mercifully with every transgressor. But, with the elemental forces of human fury let loose, Dinuzulu, as rebel or as loyalist, would have been unable to control or to check them; he was largely a figurehead. Nor, as has already been pointed out, were the ordinary Chiefs able to control. It, therefore, behoved the Government to deal with the situation promptly, and with the same severity that any wise man would be expected to use towards a fire threatening to destroy his house and all his belongings. That is why the ablest soldiers were employed. That is why McKenzie was placed in supreme command, and that is why he, almost in spite of himself, became the exponent of a drastic policy—the policy of necessity. The Government was manifestly under every obligation to protect the people, not less Native loyalists than members of its own and other European and Asiatic races. After all, there is such a law as that of self-preservation. That is what mainly warranted these undoubtedly severe, but unavoidable measures. And yet the troops were exceedingly well-disposed to the Zulu race as a whole. Satisfactory relations exist to-day between the Natives and the colonists, and will long continue to exist, unless petty, misguided policies be brought into practice.
The severity of the punishment during actual hostilities, or rather until such moment as it appeared certain the Rebellion had been "got under," received the fullest approval of every loyalist Native.[356] Nor was their commendation other than sincere. It was spontaneously and repeatedly, though, of course, cautiously expressed. There were, indeed, isolated actions which did not meet with such or anybody else's approval. The commission of irregularities in the circumstances depicted, under a general licence to stamp out rebellion at the earliest moment—a rebellion started by the Natives themselves—was only to be expected, just as they occur and are rightly condemned in every war.
It may be pointed out here that, on leaving Zululand, after witnessing the operations for several weeks, Major-General Stephenson expressed his satisfaction with the way in which they had been conducted, and also testified to "the gallantry displayed by the men, and to the readiness with which they fought their way through the scrub."
Since the Rebellion came to an end, Natal has made special endeavours to remove all reasonable and remediable complaints. Her efforts to improve the relations between the two races, especially by appointing a sympathetic Council for Native Affairs, as well as Native Commissioners, have met with success, so that restoration of mutual confidence and good feeling on a satisfactory basis is rapidly becoming an accomplished fact.[357]
The arrest of Dinuzulu and his subsequent removal to the Transvaal have completely put an end to the unrest that existed both before and after the disturbances. Zululand and Natal are in a more peaceful state now than they have been at any time since Dinuzulu came back from St. Helena.
It is generally allowed that, after a man has been tried and punished, he is entitled to enjoy once more all the rights of citizenship, but the circumstances connected with Dinuzulu being what they are, we cannot but consider the haste with which he was appointed one of the Presidents of the newly-formed South African Native Congress as somewhat unseemly and unwise.
(iv) Remarks concerning Native policy.