LIFE IN GAOL.
In the Transvaal no distinction is made between ordinary criminals and those who in other countries are recognized as first-class misdemeanants. Consequently the Reformers, without regard to the nature of their offence, their habits, health, age, or condition, were handed over to the gaoler, Du Plessis, a relative of President Kruger, to be dealt with at his kind discretion. For two days the prisoners existed on the ordinary prison fare. The majority being men in the early prime of life and in excellent health, suffered no ill effects, preferring to do with little or no food rather than touch that which was doled out to them; but to the others it was a rather serious thing. There were several men between fifty and sixty years of age whose lives had been spent under favourable conditions. There were some suffering from consumption, one from diabetes, one from fever, one from dysentery, and several others from less dangerous but sufficiently serious complaints. All alike were compelled to sleep upon the floor, with two thin blankets for protection. They were locked in at 6 p.m., and allowed out at 6 a.m. Sanitary accommodation was represented by the presence of a couple of buckets in the sleeping room. The air-space per man worked out at 145 cubic feet as against 900 feet prescribed by English prison regulations. Ventilation was afforded on the one side by square holes cut in the corrugated iron walls of the shed,[{35}] and on the other (the buildings being lean-to's against the permanent prison buildings) by grated windows opening into the native cells. Needless to say, these grated windows were originally intended to afford ventilation to the native cells, but the buildings to accommodate the Reformers had been erected against the side-walls of the Kaffir quarters. The stench was indescribable. At 6 a.m. the prisoners were allowed out into the yard, where they had the option of exercising throughout the day. The lavatories and bathing arrangements consisted of a tap in the yard and an open furrow through which the town water ran, the lower end of which was used as a wash-place by prisoners, white and black alike. Within a foot or two of the furrow where alone washing of the person or of clothing was allowed stood the gaol urinals. There was neither adequate provision in this department nor any attempt at proper supervision, the result being that through irregularities, neglect, and defective arrangement the ground on both sides of the water-furrow for six or eight yards was horribly stained and saturated by leakage. Many of the prisoners could not approach this quarter without being physically ill. Without further detail it may be stated that there were at that time over 250 prisoners, about 100 of whom were white. There were three closets and six buckets for the accommodation of all, and removals took place sometimes once a day, sometimes once in every four days. Nothing but the horror of such conditions, and the fact that they prevail still in Pretoria Gaol, and presumably in other gaols more removed from critical supervision, could warrant allusions to such a disgusting state of affairs.
At 6.15 breakfast was served. A number of tin dishes, containing one pound of mealie-meal porridge (ground maize) each were placed in a row on the ground in the yard in the same manner as a dog's food might be set out. A bucket near by contained some coarse salt in the condition in which it was collected in the natural salt pans, the cubes varying from the size of peas to the size of acorns. No sugar, milk, tea, or coffee, was allowed. In order to utilize the salt the prisoners were obliged to crush it with rough stones on the cement steps. Needless to say, but few partook of this food. To those who had not tasted it before in the course of prospecting or up-country travelling where conditions are sometimes very hard, it was no more possible to swallow it than to eat sawdust.
Dinner was at twelve o'clock, and it consisted of coarse meat boiled to that degree which was calculated to qualify the water in which it was boiled to be called soup, without depriving the meat of all title to be considered a separate dish. With this meal was also served half a pound of bread. Supper, which was provided at five o'clock, was exactly the same as breakfast.
Two days of this fare told very severely upon those whose physical condition was not of the best. By the third day several of the older men and those in ill-health had broken down and were placed on hospital fare. Matters were sufficiently serious to induce the authorities to allow gradual amelioration of the conditions, and by degrees food of a better class was introduced. Mattresses and other articles of bedding were allowed, but stretchers although provided for in the prison regulations were denied to the men until a few hours before their release a month later, when the prisoners were permitted by the gaoler to purchase them, no doubt with an eye to reversion to him in the course of a few hours. From time to time the regulations as to food were varied at the whim of the gaoler. On one day only cooked food would be allowed in; on another only raw food; on a third nothing but tinned stuff; on a fourth all was turned back at the gates with the exception of that obtained by a few individuals at a heavy premium.
A day or two after the passing of sentence representations were made to the prisoners, excluding the four death-sentence men, that it would be advisable to appeal to the clemency of the Government for some mitigation. In that case, it was stated, there was every reason to believe that the sentence of imprisonment would be entirely remitted and that the sentence of banishment would also be commuted. The individuals from whom this suggestion first came were of the class which habitually trades between the Government and the public—the gentlemen of the backstairs. For this reason some of the prisoners gave considerable credence to the reports, whilst others for the very same reason would have nothing whatever to do with them. Hence arose a condition of things very like a deadlock among the prisoners themselves. It was represented by these agents that it would be worse than useless for some of the prisoners to petition if many others refused to do so and stood out. Some of the prisoners did actually petition—a course of action which was strongly condemned by others; but it should be borne in mind that there were among the prisoners many men who were in bad health and poor circumstances, who had heavy responsibilities in private life, and who were not only unable to pay their fines, but even unable to make any provision for their families during incarceration. Such conditions would tend to shake the nerve of most men.
With this nucleus to work upon the Government through their agents began a system of terrorism by which they hoped to establish conditions under which their 'magnanimity by inches' would appear in the most favourable possible light. The first petition presented for the signature of the prisoners was one in which they were asked to admit the justice of their sentences, to express regret for what they had done and to promise to behave themselves in the future. The document closed with an obsequious and humiliating appeal to the 'proved magnanimity of the Government.' The reception accorded to this was distinctly unfavourable, copies of the petitions being in some instances torn up and flung in the faces of those who presented them. The great majority of the prisoners refused to have anything to do with them, and on representing the view that any appeal so couched was not consistent with their self-respect, they were informed that the petition had already been shown to the President and members of the Executive Council and had been approved by them and that it would not look well to alter it now.
Every effort was made for some days to induce the prisoners to sign this document, but they refused. A certain number of the men were opposed to signing anything whatever, even the most formal appeal to the Executive Council for a revision of sentence. They based their refusal upon two reasons: 1st, that they had been arrested by an act of treachery and tried by a packed Court, and if the Executive recognized the injustice of the sentence they might act spontaneously without petition from the prisoners; 2nd, that they believed that any document however moderate which they might sign would only be the thin end of the wedge by which the Government hoped to introduce the principle of individual statements and pleas—that is to say each one to excuse himself at the expense of his neighbour, and thus enable the authorities to establish by the prisoners' own confessions the extent of the guilt and complicity which they had been unable to prove.
Under such conditions an appeal was made to Messrs. Rose Innes, Q.C., and Solomon, Q.C. These gentlemen had remained in Pretoria and devoted their time and energies to obtaining some amelioration of the conditions of imprisonment and some mitigation of the sentences imposed upon the Reformers. The petition as presented by the Government was shown to Mr. Innes, who indignantly rejected the suggestion of signing any such document. As the strongest reason adduced in favour of signing petitions was the statement that according to law and custom it was impossible for the Government to take cognizance of the prisoners' case even with every desire to mitigate the punishment unless it was brought before them by direct appeal, Mr. Innes undertook to see the President and Chief-Justice Kotzé on the subject. By this time further suggestions had been made on the subject of petitions, and the prisoners were being urged among other things to name in plain terms the extent and manner in which they would like their sentences commuted. This proposal was regarded as a preposterous and ridiculous one; but nothing is too ridiculous for Pretoria and it was necessary to deal seriously with it.
In these circumstances, Mr. Rose Innes interviewed the Chief Justice, in order to get the highest authority in the country as a guide. Mr. Kotzé would not at first express an opinion as to whether petitions should be sent in, but he was evidently inclined to recommend them as politic, 'But,' said Mr. Innes, 'it is not a question of policy; it is a matter of law. Is there anything in the law which renders it necessary for a prisoner to petition before his sentence may be revised by the Executive—anything which debars the Executive from dealing with his case if he does not petition?' Mr. Kotzé's answer was clear: 'No, certainly not—nothing whatever!'