THE ANC AND THE LAND QUESTION: THE EARLY YEARS
Pixley ka Isaka Seme[i] was requested by several Leaders and Chiefs to write a full and concise statement on the subject of the South African Native Congress. As a result, on the 24th October 1911, he produced a document titles “Native Union”. In this document, Pixley Seme pronounced that through this organization in formation… “the Natives will have the opportunity and means with which to influence the public opinion of this country and to greatly assist the South African Statesmen who are working for the peace, prosperity, and the development of this land.”
The organizing committee was tasked with convening the first sitting of the Congress in the early part of December 1911 (this eventually took place in January 1912). Seme’s document, “Native Union”, also served as “… a general announcement[ii] sent to all the Native leaders, Societies and Editors asking them to explain this important news to the people at large, and to advise them to arrange for the sending of delegates so that every section of the people shall be represented in that Conference of the races.”
On the agenda of the inaugural sitting of the Congress in January 1912 – over and above the internal organizational arrangements of the formal establishment of “the South African Native Congress as a National Society or Union for all the Natives of South Africa…”[iii] – among the items listed for consideration and deliberations by Congress was the Native Lands and Reserves. I do not have the record at this stage of what the conference resolution in this regard was, but what matters for the purpose of this discussion is that the Land Question was on the agenda of the first sitting of the South African Natives National Congress.
In his inaugural address to the South African Races Congress held at Toleni on the 2nd April 1912, its President, J. TENGO JABAVU[iv], dealt with issues of the unity of the Africans (Natives), the new Movement, the rights of the Natives under the then evolving Constitution of the Union, Education, Liquor Laws, Labour and most importantly, “The Squatters` Bill”. Jabavu condemned the principle underlying this draft legislation. The Bill was based “…on rooting Natives out of farms and old established locations under the specious title of Crownlands, the tendency being to establish whites rather than Natives on the land.” (Jabavu)
In an appeal to the British Public about The Native Land Act of 1913 by John Langalibalele Dube[v], President, South African Native National Congress – the predecessor to the African National Congress (ANC), Mafukuzela cautions that “The Native Land Act of the Union Parliament has created consternation among the Natives… This land is theirs by birth and this Act of confiscation – for such it is – is likely to give rise to serious consequences unless the Government take care…”[vi] Rev Dube makes the point that “… hundreds of native families, men, women, and little children, even at this moment, being ruthlessly evicted from their humble homes, where perchance they were born, turned homeless, helpless, and hopeless, on to the roads – wandering in misery about the land of their forefathers in search of any wretched spot whereon to live and rest. And then, think you, that at the very moment this calamity is overwhelming them, your Government and your representatives actually come forward and block the way of these wretched people to raise for themselves a new home on any farm-land. And the farm-lands are nine-elevenths of the total surface of this Province. Why, I ask, should you treat us thus? We do not ask any social equality or intercourse with your race. We do not ask anything the most fastidious of you could call unreasonable. We do not ask for anything even the lowest and vilest of your own race does not already possess. We do not ask for anything the most niggardly among you could honestly refuse us. We ask for freedom to purchase land wherever opportunities occur, and our sparse means permit. We ask that we be permitted to build for ourselves a home wherever a landlord is agreeable. Who can affirm that such requests are unreasonable or impossible…” – it appears from this extract that the concept of the “willing buyer willing seller” was endorsed by the ANC as early as 1912.
Alongside an Appeal to the people of Britain by Rev John Dube, the ANC also sent an Appeal to the Members of the Imperial Parliament and Public of Great Britain in 1914[vii]. The ANC was “… gravely disturbed at the menace to native rights under the Natives’ Land Act, passed a strong resolution against the Bill…” The ANC further recorded to the British Parliament that “the following Religious Conferences of South Africa have passed resolutions against the passing of the Bill: Anglican, Wesleyan, Congregational, Baptist and Presbyterians…” Through its appeal and deputation to the British Parliament, the ANC sought to “save the Union from the disintegration which must inevitably follow the enforcement of the Natives’ Land Act.”
The ANC specifically objected to the following provisions of the legislation, being the Land Act which the Governor-General of the Union of South Africa signed on June 16th, 1913, declared in its first clause: – “Except with the approval of the Governor-General-
“(a) A Native shall not enter into any agreement or transaction for the purchase, hire, or other acquisition from a person other than a native, of any such land, or of any right thereto, interest therein, or servitude thereover, and
“(b) A person other than a native shall not enter into any agreement or transaction for the purchase, hire, or other acquisition from a native of any such land, or of any right thereto, interest therein, or servitude thereover.”
The ANC highlighted the fact that the operation of the Act had produced six classes of sufferers:
“(a) Persons under notice to quit.
“(b) Persons actually evicted from farms.
“(c) Migrants to territories outside the Union.
“(d) Homeless wanderers with families and stock in search of new homes.
“(e) Persons who had to leave their crops unreaped, or who had not ploughed this season; and;
“(f) Persons who yield unrequited labour.”
The effect of the enforcement of these provisions was that when a native leaves a farm on the expiry of his tenancy or otherwise, he was at once rendered homeless because the Act did not allow him to purchase, hire, or lease land anywhere for farming purposes. The native could live on a farm only as a servant to the farmer. The above classes of sufferers were the result of Parliament legislating natives off the farms without making provision for their settlement.
The ANC objected to the Land Act on the basis that the discriminated (differentiated) against them because:
- It excluded the Native from the free purchase of and dealing in land;
- It made provision for “slavery conditions” in that it encouraged the farmer to exact unpaid service from the native tenants; and
- under the new Law also no native may occupy or own any land in the orange Free State.
Following a Special Session held in Johannesburg on the 16th December 1918, the ANC sent a petition to King George V. The delegation that went to England to present the petition was led by the Vice President of the ANC, Sol Plaatje[viii].
The King George petition began by reciting some of the issues that had been raised by the August 1914 Deputation to the Members of the Imperial Parliament and Public of Great Britain that had been sent by the then President of the ANC, Rev John Dube – prime among which being the appeal to His Majesty “to exercise the right of veto against the Natives Land Act 1913…”[ix] The 1918 petition heaped praises on the British Constitution and the United State of America in defending the rights of the weak and vulnerable – it went on to acknowledge the late Queen Victoria’s role, particularly with Her Majesty’s “Proclamation of Natal in 1843, (wherein) any discrimination in the eyes of the law on account of race, colour, or creed, as well as slavery in any shape or form, were distinctly repudiated. Even under the two Conventions in the Transvaal in 1881 and 1884, the late Queen Victoria discountenanced slavery in any shape or form…”[x]
The petition sent to King George V specifically brought to the attention of His Majesty “that the policy proposed by the successive Governments in South Africa have from time to time been detrimental to the original rights of your subjects in land ownership and occupation followed by calculated encroachments on their inherent rights to acquire land, as also the projected administrator of Native Affairs, – all of which have confirmed previous apprehensions and misgivings and have created serious alarm and mistrust accordingly.”[xi]
In his Presidential Address to the Annual Conference of the South African Native National Congress held on the 6th May 1919 held in the Cape Colony (Eastern Cape), SM Makgatho also dealt extensively with the question of the land. In his introductory remarks, Sefako Makgatho noted that “the Native Lands Act still operates as mercilessly in different parts of the Union, and as a result many native families are still working for white farmers only for their food…”[xii] Makgatho also addressed the issues that relate to the Native Affairs Administration Bill and the The Native Urban Areas Bill.
These draft legislations made provisions for such discriminatory practices as forbidding whites from renting or selling a house to a Native in any town or village in the Union. On the face of it, it appears that all these land related legislations were illegal. Queen Victoria’s Proclamation of Natal in 1843 repudiated all discrimination on account of race, colour, or creed, as well as slavery in any shape or form. In the two Conventions in the Transvaal in 1881 and 1884, Queen Victoria abolished slavery in any shape or form.
The Land Act and other related legislations in draft form or otherwise were also in violation of the 1897 Proclamation relating to the territory of Zululand which provided for this area to “…remain integral for the use and occupation of the original inhabitants in terms of Her Late Majesty’s Annexation Proclamation…” These legislations also violated “Her Late Majesty’s Proclamation of 1848 in conjunction with the Convention of 1854 relative to certain lands in the Orange Free State belonging to and claimed by the Batlokoa and the Bagolokoe tribes… …these claims afford a just case for review and readjustment in the Orange Free State because the undertakings then given under the said Proclamation and Convention have been departed from without any compensation or other relief being granted to the original owners of the land… …a review of the Conventions of 1881 and 1884 relating to the Transvaal, wherein under Article 19, Freedom to acquire land and the setting aside of tribal land or locations were, amongst other things, assured to the Native inhabitants. These assurances have scarcely ever been carried out and today Your Majesty’s subjects in the Northern Transvaal find themselves dispossessed of land and their original holdings encroached upon… …a review of the Proclamations affecting what is now termed the Transkeian Territories in the Cape Province…”[xiii]
