(F. R. C.)
History
Discovery and Settlement.—Bartholomew Diaz, the Portuguese navigator, discovered the Cape of Good Hope in 1488, and Vasco da Gama in 1497 sailed along the whole coast of South Africa on his way to India. The Portuguese, attracted by the riches of the East, made no permanent settlement at the Cape. But the Dutch, who, on the decline of the Portuguese power, established themselves in the East, early saw the importance of the place as a station where their vessels might take in water and provisions. They did not, however, establish any post at the Cape until 1652, when a small garrison under Jan van Riebeek were sent there by the Dutch East India Company. Riebeek landed at Table Bay and founded Cape Town. In 1671 the first purchase of land from the Hottentots beyond the limits of the fort built by Riebeek marked the beginning of the Colony proper. The earliest colonists were for the most part people of low station or indifferent character, but as the result of the investigations of a commissioner sent out in 1685 a better class of immigrants was introduced. About 1686 the European population was increased by a number of the French refugees who left their country on the revocation of the edict of Nantes. The influence of this small body of immigrants on the character of the Dutch settlers was marked. The Huguenots, however, owing to the policy of the Company, which in 1701 directed that Dutch only should be taught in the schools, ceased by the middle of the 18th century to be a distinct body, and the knowledge of French disappeared. Advancing north and east from their base at Cape Town the colonists gradually acquired—partly by so-called contracts, partly by force—all the land of the Hottentots, large numbers of whom they slew. Besides those who died in warfare, whole tribes of Hottentots were destroyed by epidemics of smallpox in 1713 and in 1755. Straggling remnants still maintained their independence, but the mass of the Hottentots took service with the colonists as herdsmen, while others became hangers-on about the company’s posts and grazing-farms or roamed about the country. In 1787 the Dutch government passed a law subjecting these wanderers to certain restrictions. The effect of this law was to place the Hottentots in more immediate dependence upon the farmers, or to compel them to migrate northward beyond the colonial border. Those who chose the latter alternative had to encounter the hostility of their old foes, the Bushmen, who were widely spread over the plains from the Nieuwveld and Sneeuwberg mountains to the Orange river. The colonists also, pressing forward to those territories, came in contact with these Ishmaelites—the farmers’ cattle and sheep, guarded only by a Hottentot herdsman, offering the strongest temptation to the Bushman. Reprisals followed; and the position became so desperate that the extermination of the Bushmen appeared to the government the only safe alternative. “Commandoes” or war-bands were sent out against them, and they were hunted down like wild beasts. Within a period of six years, it is said, upwards of 3000 were either killed or captured. Out of the organization of these commandoes, with their field-commandants and field-cornets, has grown the common system of local government in the Dutch-settled districts of South Africa.
It was not to the hostility of the natives, nor to the hard struggle with nature necessary to make agriculture profitable on Karroo or veld, that the slow progress made by the colonists was due, so much as to the narrow and tyrannical policy adopted by the East India Company, which closed the colony against free immigration, kept the whole of the trade in its own hands, combined the administrative, legislative and judicial powers in one body, prescribed to the farmers the nature of the crops they were to grow, demanded from them a large part of their produce, and harassed them with other exactions tending to discourage industry and enterprise. (See furtherSouth Africa, where the methods and results of Dutch colonial government are considered in their broader aspects.) To this mischievous policy is ascribed that dislike to orderly government, and that desire to escape from its control, which characterized for many generations the “boer” or farmer class of Dutch settlers—qualities utterly at variance with the character of the Dutch in their native country. It was largely to escape oppression that the farmers trekked farther and farther from the seat of government. The company, to control the emigrants, established a magistracy at Swellendam in 1745 and another at Graaff Reinet in 1786. The Gamtoos river had been declared,c.1740, the eastern frontier of the colony, but it was soon passed. In 1780, however, the Dutch, to avoid collision with the warlike Kaffir tribes advancing south and west from east central Africa, agreed with them to make the Great Fish river the common boundary. In 1795 the heavily taxed burghers of the frontier districts, who were afforded no protection against the Kaffirs, expelled the officials of the East India Company, and set up independent governments at Swellendam and Graaff Reinet. In the sameyear, Holland having fallen under the revolutionary government of France, a British force under General Sir James Craig was sent to Cape Town to secure the colony for the prince of Orange—a refugee in England—against the French. The governor of Cape Town at first refused to obey the instructions from the prince, but on the British proceeding to take forcible possession he capitulated.3His action was hastened by the fact that the Hottentots, deserting their former masters, flocked to the British standard. The burghers of Graaff Reinet did not surrender until a force had been sent against them, while in 1799 and again in 1801 they rose in revolt. In February 1803, as a result of the peace of Amiens, the colony was handed over to the Batavian Republic, which introduced many needful reforms, as had the British during their eight years’ rule. (One of the first acts of General Craig had been to abolish torture in the administration of justice.) War having again broken out, a British force was once more sent to the Cape. After an engagement (Jan. 1806) on the shores of Table Bay the Dutch garrison of Cape Castle surrendered to the British under Sir David Baird, and in 1814 the colony was ceded outright by Holland to the British crown. At that time the colony extended to the line of mountains guarding the vast central plateau, then called Bushmansland, and had an area of about 120,000 sq. m. and a population of some 60,000, of whom 27,000 were whites, 17,000 free Hottentots and the rest slaves. These slaves were mostly imported negroes and Malays. Their introduction was the chief cause leading the white settlers to despise manual labour.
The First and Second Kaffir Wars.—At the time of the cession to Great Britain the first of several wars with the Kaffirs had been fought. (The numerous minor conflicts which since 1789 had taken place between the colonists and the Kaffirs—the latter sometimes aided by Hottentot allies—are not reckoned in the usual enumeration of the Kaffir wars.) The Kaffirs, who had crossed the colonial frontier, had been expelled from the district between the Sunday and Great Fish rivers known as the Zuurveld, which became a sort of neutral ground. For some time previous to 1811 the Kaffirs, however, had taken possession of the neutral ground and committed depredations on the colonists. In order to expel them from the Zuurveld, Colonel John Graham took the field with a mixed force in December 1811, and in the end the Kaffirs were driven beyond the Fish river. On the site of Colonel Graham’s headquarters arose the town which bears his name. In 1817 further trouble arose with the Kaffirs, the immediate cause of quarrel being an attempt by the colonial authorities to enforce the restitution of some stolen cattle. Routed in 1818 the Kaffirs rallied, and in the early part of 1819 poured into the colony in vast hordes. Led by a prophet-chief named Makana, they attacked Graham’s Town on the 22nd of April, then held by a handful of white troops. Help arrived in time and the enemy were beaten back. It was then arranged that the land between the Fish and Keiskamma rivers should be neutral territory.
The British Settlers of 1820.—The war of 1817-19 led to the first introduction of English settlers on a considerable scale, an event fraught with far-reaching consequences. The then governor, Lord Charles Somerset, whose treaty arrangements with the Kaffir chiefs had proved unfortunate, desired to erect a barrier against the Kaffirs by settling white colonists in the border district. In 1820, on the advice of Lord Charles, parliament voted £50,000 to promote emigration to the Cape, and 4000 British were sent out. These people formed what was known as the Albany settlement, founding Port Elizabeth and making Graham’s Town their headquarters. Intended primarily as a measure to secure the safety of the frontier, and regarded by the British government chiefly as a better means of affording a livelihood to a few thousands of the surplus population, this emigration scheme accomplished a far greater work than its authors contemplated. The new settlers, drawn from every part of the British Isles and from almost every grade of society, retained, and their descendants retain, strong sympathy with their native land. In course of time they formed a valuable counterpoise to the Dutch colonists, and they now constitute the most progressive element in the colony. The advent of these immigrants was also the means of introducing the English language at the Cape. In 1825, for the first time, ordinances were issued in English, and in 1827 its use was extended to the conduct of judicial proceedings. Dutch was not, however, ousted, the colonists becoming to a large extent bilingual.
Dislike of British Rule.—Although the colony was fairly prosperous, many of the Dutch farmers were as dissatisfied with British rule as they had been with that of the Dutch East India Company, though their ground of complaint was not the same. In 1792 Moravian missions had been established for the benefit of the Hottentots,4and in 1799 the London Missionary Society began work among both Hottentots and Kaffirs. The championship of Hottentot grievances by the missionaries caused much dissatisfaction among the majority of the colonists, whose views, it may be noted, temporarily prevailed, for in 1812 an ordinance was issued which empowered magistrates to bind Hottentot children as apprentices under conditions differing little from that of slavery. Meantime, however, the movement for the abolition of slavery was gaining strength in England, and the missionaries at length appealed from the colonists to the mother country. An incident which occurred in 1815-1816 did much to make permanent the hostility of the frontiersmen to the British. A farmer named Bezuidenhout refused to obey a summons issued on the complaint of a Hottentot, and firing on the party sent to arrest him, was himself killed by the return fire. This caused a miniature rebellion, and on its suppression five ringleaders were publicly hanged at the spot—Slachters Nek—where they had sworn to expel “the English tyrants.” The feeling caused by the hanging of these men was deepened by the circumstances of the execution—for the scaffold on which the rebels were simultaneously swung, broke down from their united weight and the men were afterwards hanged one by one. An ordinance passed in 1827, abolishing the old Dutch courts oflandroostandheemraden(resident magistrates being substituted) and decreeing that henceforth all legal proceedings should be conducted in English; the granting in 1828, as a result of the representations of the missionaries, of equal rights with whites to the Hottentots and other free coloured people; the imposition (1830) of heavy penalties for harsh treatment of slaves, and finally the emancipation of the slaves in 1834,5—all these things increased the dislike of the farmers to the government. Moreover, the inadequate compensation awarded to slave-owners, and the suspicions engendered by the method of payment, caused much resentment, and in 1835 the trekking of farmers into unknown country in order to escape from an unloved government, which had characterized the 18th century, recommenced. Emigration beyond the colonial border had in fact been continuous for 150 years, but it now took on larger proportions.
The Third Kaffir War.—On the eastern border further trouble arose with the Kaffirs, towards whom the policy of the Cape government was marked by much vacillation. On the 11th of December 1834 a chief of high rank was killed while resisting a commando party. This set the whole of the Kaffir tribes in a blaze. A force of 10,000 fighting men, led by Macomo, a brother of the chief who was killed, swept across the frontier, pillaged and burned the homesteads and murdered all who dared to resist. Among the worst sufferers were a colony of freed Hottentots who, in 1829, had been settled in the Kat river valley by the British authorities. The fighting power of the colony was scanty, but the governor, Sir Benjamin D’Urban (q.v.), acted with promptitude, and all available forces were mustered under Colonel (afterwards Sir Harry) Smith, who reached Graham’s Town on the 6th of January 1835, six days after news of the rising reached Cape Town. The enemy’sterritory was invaded, and after nine months’ fighting the Kaffirs were completely subdued, and a new treaty of peace concluded (on the 17th of September). By this treaty all the country as far as the river Kei was acknowledged to be British, and its inhabitants declared British subjects. A site for the seat of government was selected and named King Wiliam’s Town.
The Great Trek.—The action of Sir Benjamin D’Urban was not approved by the home government, and on the instruction of Lord Glenelg, secretary for the colonies, who declared that “the great evil of the Cape Colony consists in its magnitude,” the colonial boundary was moved back to the Great Fish river, and eventually (in 1837) Sir Benjamin was dismissed from office. “The Kaffirs,” in the opinion of Lord Glenelg, “had an ample justification for war; they had to resent, and endeavoured justly, though impotently, to avenge a series of encroachments” (despatch of the 26th of December 1835). This attitude towards the Kaffirs was one of the many reasons given by the Trek Boers for leaving Cape Colony. The Great Trek, as it is called, lasted from 1836 to 1840, the trekkers, who numbered about 7000, founding communities with a republican form of government beyond the Orange and Vaal rivers, and in Natal, where they had been preceded, however, by British emigrants. From this time Cape Colony ceased to be the only civilized community in South Africa, though for long it maintained its predominance. Up to 1856 Natal was, in fact, a dependency of the Cape (seeSouth Africa). Considerable trouble was caused by the emigrant Boers on either side of the Orange river, where the new comers, the Basutos and other Kaffir tribes, Bushmen and Griquas contended for mastery. The Cape government endeavoured to protect the rights of the natives. On the advice of the missionaries, who exercised great influence with all the non-Dutch races, a number of native states were recognized and subsidized by the Cape government, with the object—not realized—of obtaining peace on this northern frontier. The first of these “Treaty States” recognized was that of the Griquas of Griqualand West. Others were recognized in 1843 and 1844—in the last-named year a treaty was made with the Pondoes on the eastern border. During this period the condition of affairs on the eastern frontier was deplorable, the government being unable or unwilling to afford protection to the farmers from the depredations of the Kaffirs. Elsewhere, however, the colony was making progress. The change from slave to free labour proved to be advantageous to the farmers in the western provinces; an efficient educational system, which owed its initiation to Sir John Herschel, the astronomer (who lived in Cape Colony from 1834 to 1838), was adopted; Road Boards were established and did much good work; to the staple industries—the growing of wheat, the rearing of cattle and the making of wine—was added sheep-raising; and by 1846 wool became the most valuable export from the country. The creation, in 1835, of a legislative council, on which unofficial members had seats, was the first step in giving the colonists a share in the government.
The War of the Axe.—Another war with the Kaffirs broke out in 1846 and was known as the War of the Axe, from the murder of a Hottentot, to whom an old Kaffir thief was manacled, while being conveyed to Graham’s Town for trial for stealing an axe. The escort was attacked by a party of Kaffirs and the Hottentot killed. The surrender of the murderer was refused, and war was declared in March 1846. The Gaikas were the chief tribe engaged in the war, assisted during the course of it by the Tambukies. After some reverses the Kaffirs were signally defeated on the 7th of June by General Somerset on the Gwangu, a few miles from Fort Peddie. Still the war went on, till at length Sandili, the chief of the Gaikas, surrendered, followed gradually by the other chiefs; and by the beginning of 1848 the Kaffirs were again subdued, after twenty-one months’ fighting.
Extension of British Sovereignty.—In the last month of the war (December 1847) Sir Harry Smith reached Cape Town as governor of the colony, and with his arrival the Glenelg policy was reversed. By proclamation, on the 17th of December, he extended the frontier of the colony northward to the Orange river and eastward to the Keiskamma river, and on the 23rd, at a meeting of the Kaffir chiefs, announced the annexation of the country between the Keiskamma and the Kei rivers to the British crown, thus reabsorbing the territory abandoned by order of Lord Glenelg. It was not, however, incorporated with the Cape, but made a crown dependency under the name of British Kaffraria. For a time the Kaffirs accepted quietly the new order of things. The governor had other serious matters to contend with, including the assertion of British authority over the Boers beyond the Orange river, and the establishment of amicable relations with the Transvaal Boers. In the colony itself a crisis arose out of the proposal to make it a convict station.
The Convict Agitation and Granting of a Constitution.—In 1848 a circular was sent by the 3rd Earl Grey, then colonial secretary, to the governor of the Cape (and to other colonial governors), asking him to ascertain the feelings of the colonists regarding the reception of a certain class of convicts, the intention being to send to South Africa Irish peasants who had been driven into crime by the famine of 1845. Owing to some misunderstanding, a vessel, the “Neptune,” was despatched to the Cape before the opinion of the colonists had been received, having on board 289 convicts, among whom were John Mitchell, the Irish rebel, and his colleagues. When the news reached the Cape that this vessel was on her way, the people of the colony became violently excited; and they established an anti-convict association, by which they bound themselves to cease from all intercourse of every kind with persons in any way connected “with the landing, supplying or employing convicts.” On the 19th of September 1849 the “Neptune” arrived in Simon’s Bay. Sir Harry Smith, confronted by a violent public agitation, agreed not to land the convicts, but to keep them on board ship in Simon’s Bay till he received orders to send them elsewhere. When the home government became aware of the state of affairs orders were sent directing the “Neptune” to proceed to Tasmania, and it did so after having been in Simon’s Bay for five months. The agitation did not, however, pass away without other important results, since it led to another movement, the object of which was to obtain a free representative government for the colony. This concession, which had been previously promised by Lord Grey, was granted by the British government, and, in 1854, a constitution was established of almost unprecedented liberality.
The Kaffir War of 1850-1853.—The anti-convict agitation had scarcely ceased when the colony was once again involved in war. The Kaffirs bitterly resented their loss of independence, and ever since the last war had been secretly preparing to renew the struggle. Sir Harry Smith, informed of the threatening attitude of the natives, proceeded to the frontier, and summoned Sandili and the other chiefs to an interview. Sandili refused obedience; upon which, at an assembly of other chiefs (October 1850), the governor declared him deposed from his chiefship, and appointed an Englishman, Mr Brownlee, a magistrate, to be temporary chief of the Gaika tribe. The governor appears to have believed that the measures he took would prevent a war and that Sandili could be arrested without armed resistance. On the 24th of December Col. Geo. Mackinnon, being sent with a small force with the object of securing the chief, was attacked in a narrow defile by a large body of Kaffirs, and compelled to retreat with some loss. This was the signal for a general rising of the Gaika tribe. The settlers in the military villages, which had been established along the frontier, assembled in fancied security to celebrate Christmas Day, were surprised, many of them murdered, and their houses given to the flames. Other disasters followed in quick succession. A small patrol of military was cut off to a man. The greater part of the Kaffir police deserted, many of them carrying off their arms and accoutrements. Emboldened by success, the enemy in immense force surrounded and attacked Fort Cox, where the governor was stationed with an inconsiderable force. More than one unsuccessful attempt was made to relieve Sir Harry; but his dauntless spirit was equal to the occasion. At the head of 150 mounted riflemen, accompanied by Colonel Mackinnon, he dashed out of the fort,and, through a heavy fire of the enemy, rode to King William’s Town—a distance of 12 m. Meantime, a new enemy appeared. Some 900 of the Kat river Hottentots, who had in former wars been firm allies of the British, threw in their lot with their hereditary enemies—the Kaffirs. They were not without excuses. They complained that while doing burgher duty in former wars—the Cape Mounted Rifles consisted largely of Hottentot levies—they had not received the same treatment as others serving in defence of the colony, that they got no compensation for the losses they had sustained, and that they were in various ways made to feel they were a wronged and injured race. A secret combination was formed with the Kaffirs to take up arms to sweep the Europeans away and establish a Hottentot republic. Within a fortnight of the attack on Colonel Mackinnon the Kat river Hottentots were also in arms. Their revolt was followed by that of the Hottentots at other missionary stations; and part of the Hottentots of the Cape Mounted Rifles followed their example, including the very men who had escorted the governor from Fort Cox. But numbers of Hottentots remained loyal and the Fingo Kaffirs likewise sided with the British.
After the confusion caused by the sudden outbreak had subsided, and preparations had been made, Sir Harry Smith and his gallant force turned the tide of war against the Kaffirs. The Amatola mountains were stormed; and the paramount chief Kreli, who all along covertly assisted the Gaikas, was severely punished. In April 1852 Sir Harry Smith was recalled by Earl Grey, who accused him—unjustly, in the opinion of the duke of Wellington—of a want of energy and judgment in conducting the war, and he was succeeded by Lieutenant-General Cathcart. Kreli was again attacked and reduced to submission. The Amatolas were finally cleared of the Kaffirs, and small forts erected among them to prevent their reoccupation. The British commanders were hampered throughout by the insufficiency of their forces, and it was not till March 1853 that this most sanguinary of Kaffir wars was brought to a conclusion, after a loss of many hundred British soldiers. Shortly afterwards, British Kaffraria was made a crown colony. The Hottentot settlement at Kat river remained, but the Hottentot power within the colony was now finally crushed.
The Great Amaxosa Delusion.—From 1853 the Kaffir tribes on the east gave little trouble to the colony. This was due, in large measure, to an extraordinary delusion which arose among the Amaxosa in 1856, and led in 1857 to the death of some 50,000 persons. This incident is one of the most remarkable instances of misplaced faith recorded in history. The Amaxosa had not accepted their defeat in 1853 as decisive and were preparing to renew the struggle with the white men. At this juncture, May 1856, a girl named Nongkwase told her father that on going to draw water from a stream she had met strangers of commanding aspect. The father, Mhlakza, went to see the men, who told him that they were spirits of the dead, who had come, if their behests were obeyed, to aid the Kaffirs with their invincible power to drive the white man from the land. Mhlakza repeated the message to his chief, Sarili, one of the most powerful Kaffir rulers. Sarili ordered the commands of the spirits to be obeyed. These orders were, at first, that the Amaxosa were to destroy their fat cattle. The girl Nongkwase, standing in the river where the spirits had first appeared, heard unearthly noises, interpreted by her father as orders to kill more and more cattle. At length the spirits commanded that not an animal of all their herds was to be left alive, and every grain of corn was to be destroyed. If that were done, on a given date myriads of cattle more beautiful than those destroyed would issue from the earth, while great fields of corn, ripe and ready for harvest, would instantly appear. The dead would rise, trouble and sickness vanish, and youth and beauty come to all alike. Unbelievers and the hated white man would on that day utterly perish. The people heard and obeyed. Sarili is believed by many persons to have been the instigator of the prophecies. Certainly some of the principal chiefs regarded all that was done simply as the preparation for a last struggle with the whites, their plan being to throw the whole Amaxosa nation fully armed and in a famishing condition upon the colony. There were those who neither believed the predictions nor looked for success in war, but destroyed their last particle of food in unquestioning obedience to their chief’s command. Either in faith that reached the sublime, or in obedience equally great, vast numbers of the people acted. Great kraals were also prepared for the promised cattle, and huge skin sacks to hold the milk that was soon to be more plentiful than water. At length the day dawned which, according to the prophecies, was to usher in the terrestrial paradise. The sun rose and sank, bat the expected miracle did not come to pass. The chiefs who had planned to hurl the famished warrior host upon the colony had committed an incredible blunder in neglecting to call the nation together under pretext of witnessing the resurrection. This error they realized too late, and endeavoured by fixing the resurrection for another day to gather the clans, but blank despair had taken the place of hope and faith, and it was only as starving suppliants that the Amaxosa sought the British. The colonists did what they could to save life, but thousands perished miserably. In their extremity many of the Kaffirs turned cannibals, and one instance of parents eating their own child is authenticated. Among the survivors was the girl Nongkwase; her father perished. A vivid narrative of the whole incident will be found in G.M. Theal’sHistory and Geography of South Africa(3rd ed., London, 1878), from which this account is condensed. The country depopulated as the result of this delusion was afterwards peopled by European settlers, among whom were members of the German legion which had served with the British army in the Crimea, and some 2000 industrious North German emigrants, who proved a valuable acquisition to the colony.
Sir George Grey’s Governorship.—In 1854 Sir George Grey became governor of the Cape, and the colony owed much to his wise administration. The policy, imposed by the home government, of abandoning responsibility beyond the Orange river, was, he perceived, a mistaken one, and the scheme he prepared in 1858 for a confederation of all South Africa (q.v.) was rejected by Great Britain. By his energetic action, however, in support of the missionaries Moffat and Livingstone, Sir George kept open for the British the road through Bechuanaland to the far interior. To Sir George was also due the first attempt, missionary effort apart, to educate the Kaffirs and to establish British authority firmly among them, a result which the self-destruction of the Amaxosa rendered easy. Beyond the Kei the natives were left to their own devices. Sir George Grey left the Cape in 1861. During his governorship the resources of the colony had been increased by the opening up of the copper mines in Little Namaqualand, the mohair wool industry had been established and Natal made a separate colony. The opening, in November 1863, of the railway from Cape Town to Wellington, begun in 1859, and the construction in 1860 of the great breakwater in Table Bay, long needed on that perilous coast, marked the beginning in the colony of public works on a large scale. They were the more or less direct result of the granting to the colony of a large share in its own government. In 1865 the province of British Kaffraria was incorporated with the colony, under the title of the Electoral Divisions of King William’s Town and East London. The transfer was marked by the removal of the prohibition of the sale of alcoholic liquors to the natives, and the free trade in intoxicants which followed had most deplorable results among the Kaffir tribes. A severe drought, affecting almost the entire colony for several years, caused great depression of trade, and many farmers suffered severely. It was at this period (1869) that ostrich-farming was successfully established as a separate industry.
Whether by or against the wish of the home government, the limits of British authority continued to extend. The Basutos, who dwelt in the upper valleys of the Orange river, had subsisted under a semi-protectorate of the British government from 1843 to 1854; but having been left to their own resources on the abandonment of the Orange sovereignty, they fell into a long exhaustive warfare with the Boers of the Free State. On the urgent petition of their chief Moshesh, they were proclaimed British subjects in 1868, and their territory became part of thecolony in 1871 (seeBasutoland). In the same year the south-eastern part of Bechuanaland was annexed to Great Britain under the title of Griqualand West. This annexation was a consequence of the discovery there of rich diamond mines, an event which was destined to have far-reaching results.
(F. R. C.)
Development of Modern Conditions.—The year 1870 marks the dawn of a new era in South Africa. From that date the development of modern South Africa may be said to have fairly started, and in spite of political complications, arising from time to time, the progress of Cape Colony down to the outbreak of the Transvaal War of 1899 was steadily forward. The discovery of diamonds on the Orange river in 1867, followed immediately afterwards by the discovery of diamonds on the Vaal river, led to the rapid occupation and development of a tract of country which had hitherto been but sparsely inhabited. In 1870 Dutoitspan and Bultfontein diamond mines were discovered, and in 1871 the still richer mines of Kimberley and De Beers. These four great deposits of mineral wealth are still richly productive, and constitute the greatest industrial asset which the colony possesses. At the time of the beginning of the diamond industry, not only the territory of Cape Colony and the Boer Republics, but all South Africa, was in a very depressed condition. Ostrich-farming was in its infancy, and agriculture but little developed. The Boers, except in the immediate vicinity of Cape Town, were a primitive people. Their wants were few, they lacked enterprise, and the trade of the colony was restricted. Even the British colonists at that time were far from rich. The diamond industry therefore offered considerable attractions, especially to colonists of British origin. It was also the means at length of demonstrating the fact that South Africa, barren and poor on the surface, was rich below the surface. It takes ten acres of Karroo to feed a sheep, but it was now seen that a few square yards of diamondiferous blue ground would feed a dozen families. By the end of 1871 a large population had already gathered at the diamond fields, and immigration continued steadily, bringing new-comers to the rich fields. Among the first to seek a fortune at the diamond fields was Cecil Rhodes.
In 1858 the scheme of Sir George Grey for the federation of the various colonies and states of South Africa had been rejected, as has been stated, by the home authorities. In 1874 the 4th earl of Carnarvon, secretary of state for the colonies, who had been successful in aiding to bring about the federation of Canada, turned his attention to a similar scheme for the confederation of South Africa. The representative government in Cape Colony had been replaced in 1872 by responsible,i.e.self-government, and the new parliament at Cape Town resented the manner in which Lord Carnarvon propounded his suggestions. A resolution was passed (June 11, 1875) stating that any scheme in favour of confederation must in its opinion originate within South Africa itself. James Anthony Froude, the distinguished historian, was sent out by Lord Carnarvon to further his policy in South Africa. As a diplomatist and a representative of the British government, the general opinion in South Africa was that Froude was not a success, and he entirely failed to induce the colonists to adopt Lord Carnarvon’s views. In 1876, Fingoland, the Idutywa reserve, and Noman’s-land, tracts of country on the Kaffir frontier, were annexed by Great Britain, on the understanding that the Cape government should provide for their government. Lord Carnarvon, still bent on confederation, now appointed Sir Bartle Frere governor of Cape Colony and high commissioner of South Africa.
Frere had no sooner taken office as high commissioner than he found himself confronted with serious native troubles in Zululand and on the Kaffir frontier of Cape Colony. In 1877 there occurred an outbreak on the part of the Galekas and the Gaikas. A considerable force of imperial and colonial troops was employed to put down this rising, and the war was subsequently known as the Ninth Kaffir war. It was in this war that the famous Kaffir chief, Sandili, lost his life. At its conclusion the Transkei, the territory of the Galeka tribe, under Kreli, was annexed by the British. In the meantime Lord Carnarvon had resigned his position in the British cabinet, and the scheme for confederation which he had been pushing forward was abandoned. As a matter of fact, at that time Cape Colony was too fully occupied with native troubles to take into consideration very seriously so great a question as confederation. A wave of feeling spread amongst the different Kaffir tribes on the colonial frontier, and after the Gaika-Galeka War there followed in 1879 a rising in Basutoland under Moirosi, whose cattle-raiding had for some time past caused considerable trouble. His stronghold was taken after very severe fighting by a colonial force, but, their defeat notwithstanding, the Basutos remained in a restless and aggressive condition for several years. In 1880 the colonial authorities endeavoured to extend to Basutoland the Peace Preservation Act of 1878, under which a general disarmament of the Basutos was attempted. Further fighting followed on this proclamation, which was by no means successful, and although peace was declared in the country in December 1882, the colonial authorities were very glad in 1884 to be relieved of the administration of a country which had already cost them £3,000,000. The imperial government then took over Basutoland as a crown colony, on the understanding that Cape Colony should contribute for administrative purposes £18,000 annually. In 1880, Sir Bartle Frere, who by his energetic and statesmanlike attitude on the relations with the native states, as well as on all other questions, had won the esteem and regard of loyal South African colonists, was recalled by the 1st earl of Kimberley, the liberal secretary of state for the colonies, and was succeeded by Sir Hercules Robinson. Griqualand West, which included the diamond fields, was now incorporated as a portion of Cape Colony.
Origin of the Afrikander Bond.—The Boer War of 1881, with its disastrous termination, naturally reacted throughout South Africa; and as one of the most important results, in the year 1882 the first Afrikander Bond congress was held at Graaff Reinet. The organization of the Bond developed into one embracing the Transvaal, the Orange Free State and Cape Colony. Each country had a provincial committee with district committees, and branches were distributed throughout the whole of South Africa. At a later date the Bond in the Cape Colony dissociated itself from its Republican branches. The general lines of policy which this organization endeavoured to promote may best be gathered fromDe Patriot, a paper published in the colony, and an avowed supporter of the organization. The following extracts from articles published in 1882 will illustrate, better than anything else, the ambition entertained by some of the promoters of this remarkable organization.
“The Afrikander Bond has for its object the establishment of a South African nationality by spreading a true love for what is really our fatherland. No better time could be found for establishing the Bond than the present, when the consciousness of nationality has been thoroughly aroused by the Transvaal war.” ... “The British government keep on talking about a confederation under the British flag, but that will never be brought about. They can be quite certain of that. There is just one obstacle in the way of confederation, and that is the British flag. Let them remove that, and in less than a year the confederation would be established under the Free Afrikander flag.” “After a time the English will realize that the advice given them by Froude was the best—they must just have Simon’s Bay as a naval and military station on the way to India, and give over all the rest of South Africa to the Afrikanders.” ... “Our principal weapon in the social war must be the destruction of English trade by our establishing trading companies for ourselves.” ... “It is the duty of each true Afrikander not to spend anything with the English that he can avoid.”
“The Afrikander Bond has for its object the establishment of a South African nationality by spreading a true love for what is really our fatherland. No better time could be found for establishing the Bond than the present, when the consciousness of nationality has been thoroughly aroused by the Transvaal war.” ... “The British government keep on talking about a confederation under the British flag, but that will never be brought about. They can be quite certain of that. There is just one obstacle in the way of confederation, and that is the British flag. Let them remove that, and in less than a year the confederation would be established under the Free Afrikander flag.” “After a time the English will realize that the advice given them by Froude was the best—they must just have Simon’s Bay as a naval and military station on the way to India, and give over all the rest of South Africa to the Afrikanders.” ... “Our principal weapon in the social war must be the destruction of English trade by our establishing trading companies for ourselves.” ... “It is the duty of each true Afrikander not to spend anything with the English that he can avoid.”
De Patriotafterwards became imperialist, butOns Land, another Bond organ, continued in much the same strain.
In addition to having its press organs, the Bond from time to time published official utterances less frank in their tone than the statements of its press. Some of the Articles of the Bond’s original manifesto are entirely praiseworthy,e.g.those referring to the administration of justice, the honour of the people, &c.; such clauses as these, however, were meaningless in view of the enlightened government which obtained in Cape Colony, and for the true “inwardness” of this document it is necessary to note Article 3, which distinctly speaks of the promotion of South Africa’s independence (Zelfstandigheid). If the Bond arouseddisloyalty and mistaken aspirations in one section of the Cape inhabitants, it is equally certain that it caused a great wave of loyal and patriotic enthusiasm to pass through another and more enlightened section. A pamphlet written in 1885 for an association called the Empire League by Mr Charles Leonard, who afterwards consistently championed the cause of civil equality and impartial justice in South Africa, maintained as follows:—
“(1) That the establishment of the English government here was beneficial to all classes; and (2) that the withdrawal of that government would be disastrous to every one having vested interests in the colony.... England never can, never will, give up this colony, and we colonists will never give up England.... Let us, the inhabitants of the Cape Colony, be swift to recognize that we are one people, cast together under a glorious flag of liberty, with heads clear enough to appreciate the freedom we enjoy, and hearts resolute to maintain our true privileges; let us desist from reproaching and insulting one another, and, rejoicing that we have this goodly land as a common heritage, remember that by united action only can we realize its grand possibilities. We belong both of us to a home-loving stock, and the peace and prosperity of every home in the land is at stake. On our action now depends the question whether our children shall curse or bless us; whether we shall live in their memory as promoters of civil strife, with all its miserable consequences, or as joint architects of a happy, prosperous and united state. Each of us looks back to a noble past. United, we may ensure to our descendants a not unworthy future. Disunited, we can hope for nothing but stagnation, misery and ruin. Is this a light thing?”
“(1) That the establishment of the English government here was beneficial to all classes; and (2) that the withdrawal of that government would be disastrous to every one having vested interests in the colony.... England never can, never will, give up this colony, and we colonists will never give up England.... Let us, the inhabitants of the Cape Colony, be swift to recognize that we are one people, cast together under a glorious flag of liberty, with heads clear enough to appreciate the freedom we enjoy, and hearts resolute to maintain our true privileges; let us desist from reproaching and insulting one another, and, rejoicing that we have this goodly land as a common heritage, remember that by united action only can we realize its grand possibilities. We belong both of us to a home-loving stock, and the peace and prosperity of every home in the land is at stake. On our action now depends the question whether our children shall curse or bless us; whether we shall live in their memory as promoters of civil strife, with all its miserable consequences, or as joint architects of a happy, prosperous and united state. Each of us looks back to a noble past. United, we may ensure to our descendants a not unworthy future. Disunited, we can hope for nothing but stagnation, misery and ruin. Is this a light thing?”
It is probable that many Englishmen reading Mr Leonard’s manifesto at the time regarded it as unduly alarming, but subsequent events proved the soundness of the views it expressed. The fact is that, from 1881 onwards, two great rival ideas came into being, each strongly opposed to the other. One was that of Imperialism—full civil rights for every civilized man, whatever his race might be, under the supremacy and protection of Great Britain. The other was nominally republican, but in fact exclusively oligarchical and Dutch. The policy of the extremists of this last party was summed up in the appeal which President Kruger made to the Free State in February 1881, when he bade them “Come and help us. God is with us. It is his will to unite us as a people”—“to make a united South Africa free from British authority.” The two actual founders of the Bond party were Mr Borckenhagen, a German who was residing in Bloemfontein, and Mr Reitz, afterwards state secretary of the Transvaal. Two interviews have been recorded which show the true aims of these two promoters of the Bond at the outset. One occurred between Mr Borckenhagen and Cecil Rhodes, the other between Mr Reitz and Mr T. Schreiner, whose brother became, at a later date, prime minister of Cape Colony. In the first interview Mr Borckenhagen remarked to Rhodes: “We want a united Africa,” and Rhodes replied: “So do I.” Mr Borckenhagen then continued: “There is nothing in the way; we will take you as our leader. There is only one small thing: we must, of caurse, be independent of the rest of the world.” Rhodes replied: “You take me either for a rogue or a fool. I should be a rogue to forfeit all my history and my traditions; and I should be a fool, because I should be hated by my own countrymen and mistrusted by yours.” But as Rhodes truly said at Cape Town in 1898, “The only chance of a true union is the overshadowing protection of a supreme power, and any German, Frenchman, or Russian would tell you that the best and most liberal power is that over which Her Majesty reigns.” The other interview took place at the beginning of the Bond’s existence. Being approached by Mr Reitz, Mr T. Schreiner objected that the Bond aimed ultimately at the overthrow of British rule and the expulsion of the British flag from South Africa. To this Mr Reitz replied: “Well, what if it is so?” Mr Schreiner expostulated in the following terms: “You do not suppose that that flag is going to disappear without a tremendous struggle and hard fighting?” “Well, I suppose not, but even so, what of that?” rejoined Mr Reitz. In the face of this testimony with reference to two of the most prominent of the Bond’s promoters, it is impossible to deny that from its beginning the great underlying idea of the Bond was an independent South Africa.
Mr Hofmeyr’s Policy.—In 1882 an act was passed in the Cape legislative assembly, empowering members to speak in the Dutch language on the floor of the House, if they so desired. The intention of this act was a liberal one, but the moment of its introduction was inopportune, and its effect was to give an additional stimulus to the policy of the Bond. It was probably also the means of bringing into the House a number of Dutchmen, by no means well educated, who would not have been returned had they been obliged to speak English. By this act an increase of influence was given to the Dutch leaders. The head of the Afrikander Bond at this time in Cape Colony, and the leader of Dutch opinion, was Mr J.H. Hofmeyr, a man of undoubted ability and astuteness. Although he was recognized leader of the Dutch party in Cape Colony, he consistently refused to take office, preferring to direct the policy and the action of others from an independent position. Mr Hofmeyr sat in the house of assembly as member for Stellenbosch, a strong Dutch constituency. His influence over the Dutch members was supreme, and in addition to directing the policy of the Bond within the Cape Colony, he supported and defended the aggressive expansion policy of President Kruger and the Transvaal Boers. In 1883, during a debate on the Basutoland Dis-annexation Bill, Rhodes openly charged Mr Hofmeyr in the House with a desire to see a “United States of South Africa under its own flag.” In 1884 Mr Hofmeyr led the Bond in strongly supporting the Transvaal Boers who had invaded Bechuanaland (q.v.), proclaiming that if the Bechuanaland freebooters were not permitted to retain the territories they had seized, in total disregard of the terms of the conventions of 1881 and 1884, there would be rebellion among the Dutch of Cape Colony. Fortunately, however, for the peace of Cape Colony at that time, Sir Charles Warren, sent by the imperial government to maintain British rights, removed the invading Boers from Stellaland and Goshen—two so-called republics set up by the Boer freebooters—in March 1885 and no rebellion occurred. Nevertheless the Bond party was so strong in the House that they compelled the ministry under Sir Thomas Scanlen to resign in 1884. The logical and constitutional course for Mr Hofmeyr to have followed in these circumstances would have been to accept office and himself form a government. This he refused to do. He preferred to put in a nominee of his own who should be entirely dependent on him. Mr Upington, a clever Irish barrister, was the man he selected, and under him was formed in 1884 what will always be known in Cape history as the “Warming-pan” ministry. This action was denounced by many British colonists, who were sufficiently loyal, not only to Great Britain, but also to that constitution which had been conferred by Great Britain upon Cape Colony, to desire to see the man who really wielded political power also acting as the responsible head of the party. It was Mr Hofmeyr’s refusal to accept this responsibility, as well as the nature of his Bond policy, which won for him the political sobriquet of the “Mole.” Open and responsible exercise of a power conferred under the constitution of the country, Englishmen and English colonists would have accepted and even welcomed. But that subterranean method of Dutch policy which found its strongest expression in Pretoria, and which operated from Pretoria to Cape Town, could not but be resented by loyal colonists. From 1881 down to 1898, Mr Hofmeyr practically determined how Dutch members should vote, and also what policy the Bond should adopt at every juncture in its history. In 1895 he resigned his seat in parliament—an action which made his political dictatorship still more remarkable. This influence on Cape politics was a demoralizing one. Other well-known politicians at the Cape subsequently found it convenient to adapt their views a good deal too readily to those held by the Bond. In justice to Mr Hofmeyr, however, it is only fair to say that after the Warren expedition in 1885, which was at least evidence that Great Britain did not intend to renounce her supremacy in South Africa altogether, he adopted a less hostile or anti-British attitude. The views and attitude of Mr Hofmeyr between 1881 and 1884—when even loyal British colonists, looking to the events which followed Majuba, had almost come to believe that Great Britain had little desire to maintain her supremacy—can scarcely be wondered at.
Rhodes and Dutch Sentiment.—Recognizing the difficulties of the position, Cecil Rhodes from the outset of his political career showed his desire to conciliate Dutch sentiment by considerate treatment and regard for Dutch prejudices. Rhodes was first returned as member of the House of Assembly for Barkly West in 1880, and in spite of all vicissitudes this constituency remained loyal to him. He supported the bill permitting Dutch to be used in the House of Assembly in 1882, and early in 1884 he first took office, as treasurer-general, under Sir Thomas Scanlen. Rhodes had only held this position for six weeks when Sir Thomas Scanlen resigned, and in August of the same year he was sent by Sir Hercules Robinson to British Bechuanaland as deputy-commissioner in succession to the Rev. John Mackenzie, the London Missionary Society’s representative at Kuruman, who in the previous May had proclaimed the queen’s authority over the district. Rhodes’s efforts to conciliate the Boers failed—hence the necessity for the Warren mission. In 1885 the territories of Cape Colony were farther extended, and Tembuland, Bomvanaland and Galekaland were formally added to the colony. In 1886 Sir Gordon Sprigg succeeded Sir Thomas Upington as prime minister.
South Affican Customs Union.—The period from 1878 to 1885 in Cape Colony had been one of considerable unrest. In this short time, in addition to the chronic troubles with the Basutos—which led the Cape to hand them over to the imperial authorities—there occurred a series of native disturbances which were followed by the Boer War of 1881, and the Bechuanaland disturbances of 1884. In spite, however, of these drawbacks, the development of the country proceeded. The diamond industry was flourishing. In 1887 a conference was held in London for “promoting a closer union between the various parts of the British empire by means of an imperial tariff of customs.” At this conference it is worthy of note that Mr Hofmeyr propounded a sort of “Zollverein” scheme, in which imperial customs were to be levied independently of the duties payable on all goods entering the empire from abroad. In making the proposition he stated that his objects were “to promote the union of the empire, and at the same time to obtain revenue for the purposes of general defence.” The scheme was not at the time found practicable. But its authorship, as well as the sentiments accompanying it, created a favourable view of Mr Hofmeyr’s attitude. In the year 1888, in spite of the failure of statesmen and high commissioners to bring about political confederation, the members of the Cape parliament set about the establishment of a South African Customs Union. A Customs Union Bill was passed, and this in itself constituted a considerable development of the idea of federation. Shortly after the passing of the bill the Orange Free State entered the union. An endeavour was also made then, and for many years afterwards, to get the Transvaal to join. But President Kruger, consistently pursuing his own policy, hoped through the Delagoa Bay railway to make the South African Republic entirely independent of Cape Colony. The endeavour to bring about a customs union which would embrace the Transvaal was also little to the taste of President Kruger’s Hollander advisers, interested as they were in the schemes of the Netherlands Railway Company, who owned the railways of the Transvaal.
Diamonds and Railways.—Another event of considerable commercial importance to the Cape Colony, and indeed to South Africa, was the amalgamation of the diamond-mining companies, chiefly brought about by Cecil Rhodes, Alfred Beit and “Barney” Barnato, in 1889. One of the principal and most beneficent results of the discovery and development of the diamond mines was the great impetus which it gave to railway extension. Lines were opened up to Worcester and Beaufort West, to Graham’s Town, Graaff Reinet and Queenstown. Kimberley was reached in 1885. In 1890 the line was extended northwards on the western frontier of the Transvaal as far as Vryburg in Bechuanaland. In 1889 the Free State entered into an arrangement with the Cape Colony whereby the main trunk railway was extended to Bloemfontein, the Free State receiving half the profits. Subsequently the Free State bought at cost price the portion of the railway in its own territory. In 1891 the Free State railway was still farther extended to Viljoen’s Drift on the Vaal river, and in 1892 it reached Pretoria and Johannesburg.
Rhodes as Prime Minister: Native Policy.—In 1889 Sir Henry Loch was appointed high commissioner and governor of Cape Colony in succession to Sir Hercules Robinson. In 1890 Sir Gordon Sprigg, the premier of the colony, resigned, and a Rhodes government was formed. Prior to the formation of this ministry (see table at end of article), and while Sir Gordon Sprigg was still in office, Mr Hofmeyr approached Rhodes and offered to put him in office as a Bond nominee. This offer was declined. When, however, Rhodes was invited to take office after the downfall of the Sprigg ministry, he asked the Bond leaders to meet him and discuss the situation. His policy of customs and railway unions between the various states, added to the personal esteem in which he was at this time held by many of the Dutchmen, enabled him to undertake and to carry on successfully the business of government.
The colonies of British Bechuanaland and Basutoland were now taken into the customs union existing between the Orange Free State and Cape Colony. Pondoland, another native territory, was added to the colony in 1894, and the year was marked by the Glen Grey Act, a departure in native policy for which Rhodes was chiefly responsible. It dealt with the natives residing in certain native reserves, and in addition to providing for their interests and holdings, and in other ways protecting the privileges accorded to them, the principle of the duty of some degree of labour devolving upon every able-bodied native enjoying these privileges was asserted, and a small labour tax was levied.6This is in many respects the most statesmanlike act dealing with natives on the statute-book; and in the session of 1895 Rhodes was able to report to the Cape parliament that the act then applied to 160,000 natives. In 1905 the labour clauses of this act, which had fallen into desuetude, were repealed. The clauses had, however, achieved success, in that they had caused many thousands of natives to fulfil the conditions requisite to claim exemption.
In other respects Rhodes’s native policy was marked by combined consideration and firmness. Ever since the granting of self-government the natives had enjoyed the franchise. An act passed in 1892, at the instance of Rhodes, imposed an educational test on applicants for registration, and made other provisions, all tending to restrict the acquisition of the franchise by “tribal” natives, the possible danger arising from a large native vote being already obvious (see sectionConstitution).
Rhodes opposed the native liquor traffic, and at the risk of offending some of his supporters among the brandy-farmers of the western provinces, he suppressed it entirely on the diamond mines, and restricted it as far as he was able in the native reserves and territories. Nevertheless the continuance of this traffic on colonial farms, as well as to some extent in the native territories and reserves, is a black spot in the annals of the Cape Colony. The Hottentots have been terribly demoralized, and even partially destroyed by it in the western province.
Another and little-known instance of Rhodes’s keen insight in dealing with native affairs—an action which had lasting results on the history of the colony—may be given. After the native territories east of the Kei had been added to Cape Colony, a case of claim to inheritance came up for trial, and in accordance with the law of the colony, the court held that the eldest son of a native was his heir. This decision created the strongest resentment among the people of the territory, as it was in distinctcontradiction to native tribal law, which recognized the great son, or son of the chief wife, as heir. The government were threatened with a native disturbance, when Rhodes telegraphed his assurance that compensation should be granted, and that such a decision should never be given again. This assurance was accepted and tranquillity restored. At the close of the next session (that of 1894), after this incident had occurred, Rhodes laid on the table a bill drafted by himself, the shortest the House had ever seen. It provided that all civil cases were to be tried by magistrates, an appeal to lie only to the chief magistrate of the territory with an assessor. Criminal cases were to be tried before the judges of supreme court on circuit. The bill was passed, and the effect of it was, inasmuch as the magistrates administered according to native law, that native marriage customs and laws (including polygamy) were legalized in these territories. Rhodes had retrieved his promise, and no one who has studied and lived amongst the Bantu will question that the action taken was both beneficent and wise.
During 1895 Sir Hercules Robinson was reappointed governor and high commissioner of South Africa in succession to Sir Henry Loch, and in the same year Mr Chamberlain became secretary of state for the colonies.
Movement for Commercial Federation.—With the development of railways, and the extension of trade between Cape Colony and the Transvaal, there had grown up a closer relationship on political questions. Whilst premier of Cape Colony, by means of the customs union and in every other way, Rhodes endeavoured to bring about a friendly measure of at least commercial federation among the states and colonies of South Africa. He hoped to establish both a commercial and a railway union, and a speech which he made in 1894 at Cape Town admirably describes this policy:—