Boer History1826 at the Cape of Good Hope: Bourke, the Atlas, Ordinance Nineteen, and the Advertiser
Bourke in the Rainbow and Somerset in the Atlas — February–March 1826
Leave of absence for Lord Charles Henry Somerset had been announced in parliament as early as June 1825. Months passed without that Beaufort reaching England. Somerset was still in the oaths from the evening of the 30th of November 1821. At the beginning of this year the feeling in London was so strong that Earl Bathurst considered it necessary to recall the governor to give explanations, in case he should not immediately proceed home of his own accord. The Times of the 19th of January demanded his trial, and Mr. Brougham was called upon to fulfil the promise to impeach him. Petitions against the governor from frontier farmers reached England early in the year. In January the reverend Dr. John Philip left Capetown, laden with the results of his researches, and arrived in London in the following April. The pressure mattered because a governor who had asked leave in 1825 was now being told to come home and answer, and because the missionary who had been collecting evidence against colonial treatment of coloured people was taking that evidence to England. [3] [4] [7]
On the 8th of February Major-General Richard Bourke arrived in the ship-of-war Rainbow, with instructions to carry on the administration during the absence of the governor. He was gazetted lieutenant-governor, not yet governor in chief. Bathurst had announced on the 20th of August 1825 that the colony would be cut into two provinces of nearly equal extent, the east with a distinct government and a council of its own, Somerset remaining governor in chief and conducting the civil administration of the west only, Bourke taking the east at 3600 pounds a year in direct communication with the secretary of state. That cut could not be formed as soon as intended, because early in this year Somerset left the colony to visit England. From the tenor of the communications it was already clear that Bourke was being sent out as administrator of the whole colony and not merely of the east. The arrival mattered because a lieutenant-governor named for a province that did not yet exist now sat ready to take the whole Cape the moment Somerset boarded. [3] [4]
Bourke’s first meeting of the Council of Advice was that of the 14th of February, when a letter from the Burgher Senate was read, complaining of abusive and calumnious matter which had appeared just previously in the South African Commercial Advertiser. That paper, George Greig’s twice-weekly, had been allowed to reappear on the 31st of August 1825 under a license from the governor in council that could be cancelled at any time. Thus early Bourke came into contact with the press trouble which continued throughout his administration. On general principles he favoured a free press combined with a more intelligible law of libel, in preference to a government license resumable at pleasure; but in the special case of this colony as he then found it he stated that some efficient control was without doubt necessary. There were not here, as in England, papers attached to the executive and written in its defence. The February sitting mattered because the new lieutenant-governor’s first council was already a complaint against a newspaper, and because he said control was needed even while he preferred a libel law to a license. [4]
On the 5th of March Lord Charles, with his wife and eldest daughter, embarked in the East India Company’s ship Atlas and sailed for England. He left the remaining members of his family at the Cape, as he confidently expected to return at no very distant date. He did not sail until this day, so he did not reach England until just a year after circumstances called for his return. That delay produced the impression that the government was anxious to stifle inquiry and to shield him from punishment. The same day Bourke was sworn in as lieutenant-governor. The embarkation mattered because a Beaufort went home to refute calumnies while a lieutenant-governor took the oaths for a province that had not been cut, and because the delay itself was read in London as protection. [3] [4]
On the 10th of February, between Bourke’s arrival and Somerset’s embarkation, the sale of the drostdy house at Grahamstown was carried into effect, when all was sold except the powder magazine and artillery stables — but a little later these also were brought to the hammer. The lofty walls of two and a half feet had withstood the great storm of 1823 and still stood as strong as on the day Piet Retief left them. The sale mattered because the government house at the eastern drostdy was being turned into private stone while the man who had built it was still a frontier contractor, and because Grahamstown was shedding the last of that official pile just as a new lieutenant-governor sat in Capetown. [4]
English in the Courts, Customhouses, and the Churches — 1826
So far as Albany and Simonstown were concerned, no objection had been raised to the exclusive use of English in the courts of law; but in the other districts, where Dutch was spoken by the great majority, it was regarded as a very serious grievance. Somerset’s proclamation of the 5th of July 1822 had named the 1st of January 1827 as the day when English alone would be used in judicial acts. Many representations were made, at first without success. At length, on the 13th of December, that part of the proclamation which referred to courts of justice was withdrawn, and until 1828 it remained lawful to use either Dutch or English in judicial proceedings. In all other respects the proclamation was enforced, and after the dates named English became the official language of the colony, with the exception that important notices were published in the Gazette in both languages. The December withdrawal mattered because Dutch benches in Stellenbosch, Swellendam, and Graaff-Reinet kept the language of the people in court for two more years, while the offices stayed English. [3]
Port Elizabeth was rapidly becoming a place of importance, though as yet only frequented by coasting vessels. In July customhouses were first established here and at Port Frances, and direct trade with England commenced. After Somerset had left the colony the question of a free port — but not a wharf — was settled by a minute of council dated the 26th of July: His Honour the lieutenant-governor directed that from and after that date all vessels trading under the order in council of the 12th of July 1820, or under such orders as might thereafter be issued, should be permitted to enter into and clear out from the ports Elizabeth and Frances on the eastern coast. Arriving ships had until then had to clear in Capetown, and the only coast trade permitted had been that between Capetown and the two landing-places. The July opening mattered because eastern cargo no longer had to pass the Capetown customhouse first, and because a sandhill landing and a Kowie mouth were being treated as ports of the empire. [3] [4]
Captain Evatt, who watched with jealous eyes any circumstance which tended to impede those barren sandhills expanding into a large city, protested in this year against the revenues of Port Elizabeth going to Uitenhage and being spent for the benefit of that place rather than for the legitimate development of the port. At Port Frances the need of the increasing population for a place of worship led to a petition to Bourke for a plot of land on which to build a Wesleyan chapel. This was granted on the 5th of December. Then with the subscriptions which could be afforded by some and the gratuitous time and labour of others a building suitable for a chapel and Sunday school was erected. Over the first part of the Port Elizabeth–Grahamstown road, between 10000 and 12000 waggons passed annually. On the 5th of May Bourke, writing to the landdrost of Albany, approved of a road tax in so far as it was a voluntary one by the persons concerned; he pointed out that no taxes could be imposed in the colony without a legislative act of parliament, but under the circumstances he authorised the tax to be paid to the district chest. The protest and the chapel mattered because a port that now had a customhouse still sent its revenue inland, and because a Kowie congregation got ground from a lieutenant-governor who would not tax a road except as a gift. [4] [4]
In January the reverend Mr. Morgan became minister of a new congregation at Somerset East. Early in the year Mr. A. J. Caldecott was appointed government teacher at a salary of 80 pounds a year. The first fair at Somerset East was held during the whole of the third week of March, and was a most decided success; farmers travelled great distances to it, and wool was among the produce purchased or taken in exchange for European merchandise. In March a meeting of the scattered inhabitants toward Colesberg elected elders and deacons and Captain Andries Stockenstrom as political commissioner, as the first officers of the future Colesberg church. In January there were places of worship of the Dutch Reformed church at Capetown, Stellenbosch, Paarl, Tulbagh, Zwartland, Graaff-Reinet, Swellendam, Caledon, George, Uitenhage, Cradock, Beaufort West, Somerset West, Worcester, and Somerset East. The Lutherans had still but one congregation, in Capetown. The English episcopal church had five clergymen: the reverend George Hough in Capetown, the reverend George Sturt in Simonstown, the reverend Thomas Ireland in Grahamstown, the reverend William Wright in Wynberg, and the reverend Francis McCleland in Port Elizabeth. The January pulpit mattered because a Boschberg village that had been a government farm in 1825 now had a minister, a teacher, and a wool fair, and because Colesberg chose church officers four years before its title deeds arrived. [3] [4] [4]
In this year the country consistories of the Dutch Reformed church were permitted to transact their business without the supervision of political commissioners. The next meeting of the synod took place in November, and its resolutions were laid before Bourke, then acting governor. He submitted them, together with those of 1824, to the council, which made various alterations and omissions, and in that condition they were sent to England for approval. By this time it was found to be inconvenient and too expensive for the synod to meet so frequently, and thereafter it assembled only after intervals of five years. By instructions from Earl Bathurst on the 24th of March the English episcopal clergymen were required to correspond with an ecclesiastical board in London composed of the archbishops of Canterbury and York and the bishop of London; Bourke obliged them to send their letters and reports through the secretary to government, that he might see them. In January Bathurst sanctioned a salary of 100 pounds a year being paid from the colonial treasury to a clergyman of the Roman Catholic church in Capetown, and also to one in Grahamstown whenever he could be obtained. The congregation had been without a clergyman since the reverend Mr. Scully left on the 11th of July 1824, until the arrival of the reverend Theodore Wagener on the 30th of March. His labours were confined to Capetown, more especially to the soldiers in the garrison. The church orders mattered because a Dutch synod still could not pass a resolution the council did not trim, because Anglican letters had to pass the colonial secretary, and because a Catholic stipend that Somerset had withdrawn was put back on the treasury. [3] [3] [4]
In May Petrus Borchardus Borcherds, a member of the high court of justice, was appointed permanent sitting commissioner, and was directed to hold a court daily for the trial of petty criminal cases. A superintendent of police had been appointed as far back as October 1825, when the fiscal was relieved of the duty of preserving order in the town; Willem Cornelis van Ryneveld received the appointment provisionally, but was succeeded in April of this year by the baron Charles de Lorentz, for whom the duchess of Cambridge exerted her influence, and who was consequently sent out by Bathurst, with a salary of 700 pounds a year. The police change mattered because Capetown’s street order was taken from a local fiscal’s deputy and given to a man London had sent at 700 pounds, and because petty crime in the town now had a daily court of its own. [3]
British Money in the Accounts — 1826
From the 1st of January the public accounts were kept in British money. That was the date named in the ordinance of the 6th of June 1825, which had made British silver a legal tender at 1 shilling and 6 pence sterling for each paper rixdollar. A note which professed the purchasing power of an English sovereign was in reality worth no more than 7 shillings and 6 pence. The paper that should have been in circulation was rather more than 3000000 rixdollars. When the 1825 ordinance was issued the accounts stood: capital of the loan and discount bank, secured by mortgages and pledges, rds. 1385255; debt, rds. 1713950; together rds. 3099205 — at 1 s. 6 d. equal to 232440 pounds 7 s. 6 d. A few years later an excess of 487851 rixdollars was discovered, forged paper that could not be dated or assigned, and it was of necessity added to the public debt. The paper actually in circulation amounted therefore to 3587056 rixdollars, or 269029 pounds 4 s. sterling. The January change mattered because every official book in the colony was now written in pounds while the notes in men’s pockets were still rixdollars nailed at eighteen pence. [3]
Silver and copper coin to the amount of 56000 pounds was sent from England and issued to the troops during the next eighteen months, and it was notified that the officer in charge of the commissariat would issue bills upon England to any amount in exchange for either silver money or paper rixdollars at 1 shilling and 6 pence, charging 3 per cent for freight and insurance. In a short time that charge was reduced to one-half per cent, and notes to the amount of 1237000 rixdollars were exchanged — equivalent to a loan of 92775 pounds without interest by Great Britain. The remaining paper in circulation was then gradually replaced by notes stamped in England, on which the value was marked in pounds sterling, and security was given by their being made exchangeable for treasury bills at par on presentation at the commissariat office. The coin mattered because British silver in the troops’ pay was the wedge that pulled paper out of circulation, and because a million and more rixdollars went home as an interest-free loan. [3]
The ordinance affected people in various ways. All who owed money to the bank and to individuals, and all whose taxes — especially quitrents — were fixed in rixdollars, were jubilant. But persons who had brought British money to the country and invested it, those to whom money was due, those whose incomes were fixed in rixdollars, the orphan chamber, and all others to whom a rise in the rate of exchange would have been advantageous, believed themselves to be greatly wronged. A petition to the king in council received 2115 signatures, praying that the ordinance might be withdrawn or a higher rate of exchange fixed. The orphan masters represented that the property which they administered was of greater value than the whole paper in circulation, that much of it had been for many years in their care, and that a large number of their wards would be ruined. Some would be satisfied with nothing less than 4 shillings to the rixdollar, others thought 2 shillings a fair rate. On the 13th of May the lords of the treasury pronounced against any alteration, and thus it remained at 1 shilling and 6 pence. Silver money was legal tender at the reduced rate of exchange; that law meant ruin to a great many families. The petition mattered because 2115 names could not move the treasury, and because orphans and creditors paid the eighteen pence that debtors and quitrent farmers celebrated. [3] [7]
Many individuals lost heavily by it, but the colony gained by the security given to the paper money even at only three-eighths of its former nominal value. The period from 1820 to this year was one of commercial and agricultural depression, of distress not only among the recent British immigrants but among the old colonists, and of anxiety to everyone in possession of property. The depression mattered because the rixdollar was being killed in a season when farms, mortgages, and immigrant stores were already failing, and because a uniform imperial coinage was being bought at the price of Cape paper. [3]
Ordinance Nineteen and the Graaff-Reinet Petition — June–December 1826
On the 19th of June, by direction from England, an ordinance was issued by the acting governor in council for the improvement of the condition of the slaves — the nineteenth ordinance, the Trinidad order adapted. The clauses of Somerset’s proclamation of March 1823 were re-enacted with some enlargements, and two important additions were made to them. The enlargements consisted chiefly in requiring that slaves should be paid for necessary work on the sabbath, and that all should enjoy the special favours conferred by the proclamation upon the baptized only. One of the additions provided for the appointment of a protector in Capetown and assistant protectors in the country districts, whose duties should be to watch over the interests of the slaves and to see that the laws in their favour were strictly carried out. The other addition was that slaves could compel their masters to liberate either themselves, or their children, brothers, sisters, wives, or husbands, at a price to be fixed by valuators. The ordinance was to have effect from the 1st of August. It was always assumed in England that there was not the least probability of any action toward the liberation of slaves being taken by the colonies themselves. Long before pressure came from England, suggestions had been made by slave-owning colonists that all female children should be declared free at birth, so that slavery would be gradually stamped out, as the children of free women were also free. The June ordinance mattered because London was posting a Trinidad law on Cape slave-owners, and because the new clauses let a slave buy himself and put a protector between master and servant. [3] [4] [7]
When the intentions of the Home government became known in the colony, namely in June, the greatest alarm and consternation seized the slave-owning inhabitants. They foresaw not only great loss on account of the depreciation of slave property, but the greatest personal danger to themselves, their wives, and families. The Bokkeveld murders of 1824 were attributed to the proclamation of 1823, and as this new act was still more in the interest of the slaves, it was considered that greater bloodshed could not but be the inevitable result. A petition signed by 370 people of Capetown was sent to the Burgher Senate praying that that body would approach the government with a view to delaying the promulgation of the new law until they had had an opportunity of bringing their grievances before both this government and the Mother Country. This was done. On the 3rd of July the memorial of the Burgher Senate came before the governor in council. The memorialists looked with concern upon the proposed measure of allowing a slave to compel his master to liberate him upon payment of his assessed value with money which the slave himself had accumulated. They took particular exception to the 39th and 43rd articles: the former permitted slaves to appear as witnesses in criminal cases against their masters. The July memorial mattered because Capetown’s municipal board was asking delay of a law London had already sent, and because owners feared a slave’s savings and a slave’s oath in court. [4]
It was the custom to send copies of important official publications to the Burgher Senate and to the boards of landdrost and heemraden, which were convened purposely to hear them read, in order that the members might become acquainted with new laws and make them known to the farmers. On this occasion the Burgher Senate refused to have the ordinance read, and addressed a remonstrance against it to the acting governor. Bourke then sent for the members and lectured them upon their duty, to which they replied with another memorial. Two of them resigned rather than have anything to do with the ordinance, and when at length it was read by the president, only the salaried officers of the board were there to hear it. In the same way the landdrost of Stellenbosch read it to the officers of the court only, as the heemraden declined to attend. On the 26th of July a public meeting was held in Capetown, by leave of Bourke, to prepare a petition to the king in council. The opinion was generally expressed that the relationship between master and slave was already so strained that it would not bear further tension. Every one desired the total extinction of slavery upon reasonable terms, but there was much diversity of view as to the manner in which it could best be effected. A committee was appointed to draw up a memorial that the ordinance might be annulled; when the members requested leave to lay before Bourke their plans for improving the condition of the slaves and for the ultimate extinction of slavery, the council feared creating hopes in the minds of the slaves which it might not be possible to realise. The committee then separated, without further action. The refusals mattered because a law that had to be read to farmers was being shut out of the rooms that were meant to publish it, and because a public meeting allowed by Bourke could not agree how slavery should end. [3]
On the 5th of September the alterations and the reasons for making them were transmitted to Bathurst, and meeting with his approval, the modified act came into force in August. In a conciliatory manner Bourke, who at this time had succeeded Somerset, did much toward allaying the irritation produced by the nineteenth ordinance. The clamour gradually subsided, and within a few months all was working smoothly. Emancipation had been common long before the ordinance came into force. Manumissions in this year numbered 90 — against 29 in 1825 and 56 in 1824. Figures for this year give some idea of the numbers possessed by individuals: Chief Justice Sir John Truter 49 ( 25 males, 12 females, and 12 children), J. A. Myburgh of Stellenbosch 68, P. G. van der Byl 56, D. G. van Reenen of the Cape 50, Dirk Cloete 40, Stockenstrom of Graaff-Reinet 15, J. G. Cuyler 16, and the reverend F. McCleland of Port Elizabeth, a British settler, 2 (mother and child). The August force mattered because a Trinidad text had been trimmed enough for Bourke to quiet Capetown, and because 90 manumissions in this year were already more than the two years before it. [4]
To the honour of Graaff-Reinet it was said that gradual emancipation, if not originated, was most warmly advocated in that district. On the 2nd of October there was a meeting of the slaveholders of the district, when a resolution was unanimously adopted that in their opinion after a date to be fixed by government all female children should be free at birth, in order that slavery might gradually cease. Another proposal was carried by a majority, that all male children born after the same date should be free. Stockenstrom, then landdrost, went to Capetown on behalf of the slave-owners of that place to present a petition to the governor and to give the view of those who were in favour of slave emancipation. It was signed by 27 Dutch colonists, all of whom were owners of slaves. “It must have given great satisfaction to our fellow-citizens,” said they, “and our descendants will one day pride themselves that sentiments and principles which have been expressed this day did exist among us.” Stockenstrom for himself said he was the proprietor of many slaves, they formed the greater part of his property; but rather than allow the evil to go on, rather than saddle an offspring with an inheritance of the dangers and troubles under which they groaned, he wished his countrymen would unanimously come to the proposition that no distinction should be made with respect to the sexes, and that the precious boon which all seemed inclined to grant to the girls should not be withheld from the boys. This, he said, was the wish of all the principal slave-owners with whom he had conversed on the subject. As the British government had by that time also stopped all further importation of slaves, the institution, had the proposal been accepted, would thus have been extinguished in a generation. The October meeting mattered because interior Dutch owners were offering to free children at birth while London was sending a Trinidad ordinance they feared, and because Stockenstrom asked the same boon for boys as for girls. [3] [4]
The registration of slaves and all matters connected with them as instituted by Somerset, together with the orderly arrangements and control exercised by the protector of slaves and his subordinates, was productive of as much good to the free as the bond. A return of complaints from the 1st of August 1825 to the 26th of December of this year showed cases of ill-treatment brought by slaves against masters: proved 16, disproved 55, undecided 6; cases of crimes against slaves: proved 78, disproved 6, undecided 8. The rigid investigation of all complaints on both sides showed that the masters were no less in need of protection than the slaves, and that the balance of misdemeanours and crimes was greatly in favour of the latter. The return mattered because a protector’s office now counted proved cruelty both ways, and because 16 proved cases against masters sat beside 55 disproved in the same eighteen months. [4]
Fairbairn, Greig, and Bathurst’s License — 1826
The position of the press in the colony was still very precarious. By Bathurst’s instructions the South African Commercial Advertiser was being published under a license from the governor in council, which could be cancelled at any time. The rival newspaper had ceased to exist. John Fairbairn was now its sole editor; Greig was its publisher. For Bourke’s guidance in granting licenses to publish any periodical he received, in August, a despatch from Bathurst dated the 11th of April, in which general principles were laid down. That despatch contained also the confirmation of the action of the council in the previous January in suspending the publication of a new paper which Fairbairn had endeavoured to establish. At that date two periodicals were started, the New Organ by Fairbairn and De Versamelaar by Mr. Suasso de Lima. To both editors it was intimated that further publication could not be permitted unless they applied for and obtained licenses. De Lima immediately complied and was allowed to proceed. Fairbairn, on the other hand, refused to take this step — on the grounds that he did not see the necessity. Pending further instructions from London, therefore, the paper was stopped. The license mattered because a twice-weekly that had only been allowed back in 1825 still hung on a cancellable paper, and because Fairbairn would not ask for a second license while de Lima would. [3] [4]
In the Advertiser for the 24th of May there appeared a long article which had been copied verbatim from the London Times of the previous 25th of January, dealing with the legal proceedings against a public servant for embezzlement of public money, in which Somerset was accused of vindictive harshness toward the offender. As the title was altered and its origin was not mentioned, it had the appearance of an original article from the pen of either Fairbairn or Greig. To an ordinary reader there was nothing to show that this extract was not an original article. It came to the eye of Lord Charles Somerset in London, who directed Bathurst’s attention to it, and produced original documents showing it to be incorrect. Bathurst thereupon sent a despatch dated the 3rd of December to Bourke instructing him to cancel Greig’s license. That despatch was of this year; it was received in May 1827, and the paper still printed under the license through the remaining weeks of this calendar. The May article mattered because a London extract, presented as if it were Cape writing, gave Somerset in England the document with which Bathurst ordered the license pulled, and because that order would not land until the next year. [3] [4]
Nearly a whole year elapsed before Bishop Burnett’s case was resumed in parliament. On the 8th of May his petition was again presented, this time by Colonel Beaumont, the member for Northumberland, in a form modified so as to embrace some later developments. Dissatisfaction was shown at the report of the commissioners not having been laid upon the table though it had been received, and also at the non-appearance of Somerset in England. Opinion was freely expressed that the government was endeavouring to evade inquiry by deliberate delays. With respect to the petition itself it was contended by the government that it was of too general a character and did not contain specific charges on which action could be taken. This view in the end prevailed and Beaumont consented to withdraw it. Copies of letters and papers in Burnett’s case were ordered to be printed by the House of Commons on the 31st of May. On the 7th and 8th of December Burnett’s affairs were again the subject of lengthy discussion. In December Mr. Hume, who presented a petition from Captain Carnall, brought the matter on again, but discussion was still further postponed. A few days after the governor’s arrival in England there was a brief discussion of his case in the house of commons, but owing to the advanced stage of the session the subject was allowed to drop. Then parliament was dissolved, and Beaumont, the member who had been most active in introducing petitions against him, was not returned for the new house. The Commons mattered because Burnett’s charges and Carnall’s petition were kept off the table until Somerset had landed, and because a dissolution then removed the member who had pushed them. [3] [4] [4]
Of the many voluminous reports which resulted from the inquiries of William Macbean George Colebrooke and John Thomas Bigge, with William Blair as third commissioner, the most important issued this year was that of the 6th of September, dealing with the judicial system and the suggestions for reform. The greater number of recommendations contained in this report met with the approval of His Majesty’s government. It was decided, in short, to reconstruct the courts of justice on the basis of English procedure, though the ancient law, namely the Roman-Dutch, was still to be administered. The drafting of a charter of justice and the appointments of new judges were taken into consideration by Bathurst almost immediately upon the receipt of the report. Those appointments and that charter were not of this calendar. The September report mattered because the commissioners who had been sent to quiet Commons questions about Somerset were now proposing to sweep the Dutch courts and put English procedure in their place, while Roman-Dutch law was still to be the law applied. [4]
Patrols Stop at the Boundary — January–August 1826
In the ever obtrusive question of the eastern boundary Bourke commenced to legislate and introduce drastic changes before he had been in office a month. Under Somerset, when a troop of cattle was stolen from the colony, the owners applied for assistance to the nearest military post, as farmers were strictly prohibited from crossing the boundary except under command of an English officer. A party of soldiers was then sent to follow the spoor, and at the first kraal to which it led the cattle were demanded, or compensation for them. Bourke made a great change in the system. On the 11th of April he issued instructions to Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Somerset that patrols were not to cross the border, unless the stolen cattle were actually in sight. On the boundary they were to stop, and send word to the nearest chief, who was expected to take up the spoor and recover the animals. In a few instances the chiefs so called upon complied, and naturally got into difficulties with the kraals to which they traced the cattle. The result of Bourke’s system was a series of quarrels among the border clans and the recovery of about one head in every ten stolen. The April order mattered because a lieutenant-governor barely sworn was reversing the patrol rule that had followed the spoor into Xhosa country, and because nine beasts in ten now stayed beyond the Fish. [3] [4]
In January, before he left the colony, Somerset had consented to permit some temporary grazing privileges to the Gqunukhwebe clans — the utmost that could be obtained from him. The reverend William Shaw had urged the colonial government to give those clans permission to reoccupy the district between the lower courses of the Keiskama and Fish, which he considered their ancient home; Somerset had declined to put them in possession again of the jungles along the Fish river, which he considered would be an act of extreme folly. As soon as he left the colony, the missionary renewed the request, but Lieutenant-Colonel Somerset strongly opposed it. Bourke referred the matter to Bathurst, with a recommendation that the Gqunukhwebe clans should be allowed to occupy the lower portion of the ceded territory, and that Xhosa should be permitted to come into the colony and take service with the British settlers. A letter of Shaw’s to the lieutenant-governor dated the 6th of April maintained that as these chiefs had never acknowledged allegiance to Gaika, they had been unjustly dispossessed by the uncertain verbal treaty of 1819. The grazing request mattered because Shaw was asking Bourke to undo an 1819 cession the colonel on the frontier called an invitation to destroy it, and because Gqunukhwebe cattle were already being allowed, for a season, west of the Keiskama. [3] [4]
In August the secretary of state issued directions that neither Xhosa nor colonists should be allowed to settle in any part of the ceded territory; but when Bourke’s recommendation reached him, he so far modified these instructions as to permit the Gqunukhwebe chiefs to graze cattle between the Keiskama and the Beka rivers as far up as the Gwanga. This was sufficient for their purposes. Once permitted to cross the Keiskama to tend their cattle, they quickly moved in and built kraals. Lieutenant-Colonel Somerset believed the virtues of the Gqunukhwebe to exist only in the brain of Shaw, and that these people were no more to be trusted than any others; Congo had been prominent in the attack upon Grahamstown in 1819. To allow any clan free access again to the Fish River bush was, in the colonel’s view, tantamount to inviting the destruction of the whole of the frontier. Bathurst, sharing those views, admonished Shaw and warned him against holding such conferences with Pato and Congo or encouraging such expectations. The August modification mattered because a ban on settlement in the ceded strip was immediately qualified into grazing that became kraals, and because the secretary of state who allowed the cattle also warned the missionary who had asked for the land. [3] [4]
Unfortunately for the safety of the colony at this time, the military force had been greatly reduced in recent years. In order to relieve the embarrassed state of the colonial finances, the commissioners of inquiry, on the 14th of June, recommended the reduction of the cavalry of the Cape Corps, whereby the annual cost of 28088 pounds would be reduced to 21143. Bathurst, however, decided it would be better to disband the corps altogether and to replace it by a regular regiment from England. Matters were delayed in consequence of the intended regiment being required for service in Portugal. The recommendation of this year thus sat on the table; the corps still stood on the frontier through the remaining months of the calendar. The June paper mattered because the commissioners who were reconstructing the courts were also proposing to cheapen the only colonial horse on the Fish, and because Bathurst’s preferred substitute was sent to Portugal instead. [4]
Philippolis, Melville, and the Fetcani — 1826
In 1823 Landdrost Stockenstrom and the reverend Abraham Faure had caused a school to be established a couple of hours’ ride north of the Orange, at a place which Faure named Philippolis, in honour of Dr. Philip. They were in hopes of collecting together there a number of Koranas and San who were wandering about on both sides of the river, but they were disappointed. In this year, on the invitation of the head of the London Missionary Society, Adam Kok and the Griquas who were with him moved to the district between the Riet and Orange rivers, and made Philippolis their headquarters. At this time there were no other people than San and Koranas in those parts, except when a few farmers from the colony went over the Great river with their herds and remained while the grass was good. In giving the district of Philippolis to Adam Kok, Philip stipulated that the Griquas should protect the San against the farmers. Bourke was willing to address Kok as chief of that place, but he did not formally instal him or confer any authority upon him or sanction his occupation of any lands. The name Philippolis still commemorates that arrangement. The move mattered because a missionary superintendent in London was seating a Griqua captain on ground the Cape had never granted, and because Bourke would write to a chief he would not instal. [3] [4] [7]
After four years’ discouraging work at Griquatown, Mr. Melville, on the 21st of April, gave up his post. In doing so, he told the colonial secretary that in accepting the situation he had understood he would be supported in introducing order; he had been empowered to do little more than encourage the people to pay attention to the missionary, to interfere as little as possible with the customs which the Griquas had established among themselves, and to introduce order more by recommendation than enactment. The Bergenaars were uninterfered with; waggons containing gunpowder and brandy were known to arrive, and yet there was not the power to arrest the offenders. Waterboer maintained his loyal attitude among such lawlessness; plots for taking his life were formed in more than one quarter. The resignation mattered because the Cape’s agent north of the Orange was leaving a post that could recommend but not arrest, and because powder waggons to the Bergenaars still ran while Waterboer was being plotted against. [4]
North of the Orange and west of the Drakensberg the country was in a state of violent disturbance. In 1823 the waves of war which originated in Zululand had begun to roll over the Barolong country. One clan, under the chief Sifunelo, had migrated southward and fallen in with two Wesleyan missionaries, the reverend Messrs. Broadbent and Hodgson. In this year Sifunelo’s clan left Makwasi and, moving about a hundred and twenty miles to the south-west, halted at Platberg, on the southern bank of the Vaal. The reverend Robert Moffat went to visit Makaba, and found him living north of the Molopo; the missionary estimated the number of the Bangwaketsi at 70000 at the lowest computation. In this year Andrew Geddes Bain visited the country. He found Tawane with his clan living in a miserable condition by a filthy pool in the bed of the Molopo. From Tawane’s wretched kraal Bain went on to the Bangwaketsi country; the principal kraal was in a valley called Silokwalali, which the traveller found literally strewn with human skulls. A short time previously Makaba had fallen in a great battle with one of the marauding hordes, and his brother Sobeka was acting as chief of the remnant, Gasitsiwe, the rightful heir, being a minor. A portion of the Hlubi, keeping to the east of the Drakensberg, found its way into Hintsa’s country about this year and, becoming mixed with remnants of other fugitive tribes in those parts, formed the people known as the Mfengu. As early as this year some of the stragglers had got as far west as the Chumie mission: the reverend W. R. Thomson recorded under date the 5th of October that four Mfengu went to reside at the station. The interior mattered because Barolong, Bangwaketsi, and Hlubi were being driven south and west by the Zulu wars, and because four Mfengu at the Chumie in October were already inside the colonial mission line. [3] [4] [4]
Toward the end of the year these matters and perplexities on the Fish had to give place to others of far greater moment. A dark and ominous cloud was appearing in the far north-east. The wave of devastation which originated with Tshaka in Zululand had travelled in two directions; as the tribes to the south of Zululand and Natal were set in motion, the hordes of fugitives eventually appeared in the most eastern parts of the Transkeian territories. In order to learn something of the real state of affairs, Colonel Somerset, in September, set out on a reconnoitring journey into the country about the Stormberg Spruit and Klaas Smits River. He did not gain any definite information regarding the mysterious nation which was supposed to be advancing from the north-east, though he did find that the farms along the Stormberg Spruit had been abandoned on account of fear, and that even the San were in such terror that they were seeking protection from the farmers. The field-cornet Steenkamp told him that while out on patrol a short time previously he had come upon thousands of Thembu lying dead, having been killed by the Fetcani, as the unknown invaders were called. Not being prepared to make a more extensive reconnaissance, Colonel Somerset returned to Grahamstown and immediately sent off Major Andrews with a strong mounted force and some burghers to penetrate into the country beyond the Orange. Arriving at the junction of the Stormberg Spruit with that river, a party of ten men was posted on the northern bank for the protection of the stores. The remainder then commenced their journey through what later became Rouxville, following roughly the course of the Caledon, passing the Koesberg and Tandjesberg, and about where Morija stands they came upon what appeared to be a deserted village of the Fetcani — huts and cattle kraals surrounded by strong circular walls built of clay and stones. At a short distance the patrol came upon three of the people themselves, of small stature, carrying assegais. Their king was a boy named Maketa. Major Andrews returned and made his report to the lieutenant-governor in council on the 4th of December. The reconnaissance mattered because Stormberg farms were empty from fear of an unknown horde, and because a major’s report in December gave that horde a deserted village on the Caledon and a boy king named Maketa. [4]
The Tzatzoe mission was started in this year. Under the combined influence of the reverend J. Brownlee and Jan Tzatzoe, actual ruler though his father, an old man named Tzatzoe, was the nominal chief of the Ntinde then occupying the lands on which King William’s Town later stood, the Ntinde refrained for a time from joining the other clans in war upon the colony. In this year the “Inxhra Station” took the name of Lovedale, after the reverend J. Love, one of the founders of the Glasgow Missionary Society, and a missionary’s house stood upon the site. On the 13th of November, in answer to a memorial of the London society concerning Theopolis, the directors were informed that directions were given to the lieutenant-governor to grant the land in question to the institution at Theopolis, or as much of it with access to the sea as that officer might deem fit to limit it. The missions mattered because Brownlee and Tzatzoe were seating a station on the Buffalo among the Ntinde, because Inxhra took the name Lovedale, and because Theopolis was promised as much Albany land with a path to the sea as Bourke would limit. [3] [4] [4]