growing sense of power and solidarity among all the Kaffir tribes of South Africa—a sense which gave force to the “Ethiopian movement,” which, ecclesiastical in origin, was political in its development. There were moreover special local causes such as undoubted defects in the Natal administration.[1] Those Africans whose “nationalism” was greatest looked to Dinizulu as their leader, and he was accused by many colonists of having incited the rebellion. Dinizulu protested his loyalty to the British, nor was it likely that he viewed with approval the action of Bambaata, a comparatively unimportant and meddlesome chief. As time went on, however, the Natal government, alarmed at a series of murders of whites in Zululand and at the evidences of continued unrest among the natives, became convinced that Dinizulu was implicated in the rebellious movement. When a young man, in 1889, he had been convicted of high treason and had been exiled, but afterwards (in 1897) allowed to return. Now a force under Sir Duncan McKenzie entered Zululand. Thereupon Dinizulu surrendered (December 1907) without opposition, and was removed to Maritzburg. His trial was delayed until November 1908, and it was not until March 1909 that judgment was given, the court finding him guilty only on the minor charge of harbouring rebels. Meantime, in February 1908, the governor—Sir Matthew Nathan, who had succeeded Sir Henry McCallum in August 1907—had made a tour in Zululand, on which occasion some 1500 of the prisoners taken in the rebellion of 1906 were released.
The intercolonial commission had dealt with the native question as it affected South Africa as a whole; it was felt that a more local investigation was needed, and in August 1906 a strong commission was appointed to inquire into the condition of the Natal natives. The general election which was held in the following month turned Native Affairs’ Commission. on native policy and on the measures necessary to meet the commercial depression. The election, which witnessed the return of four Labour members, resulted in a ministerial majority of a somewhat heterogeneous character, and in November 1906 Mr Smythe resigned, being succeeded by Mr F. R. Moor, who in his election campaign had criticized the Smythe ministry for their financial proposals and for the “theatrical” manner in which they had conducted their conflict with the home government. Mr Moor remained premier until the office was abolished by the establishment of the Union of South Africa. In August 1907 the report of the Native Affairs’ Commission was published. The commission declared that the chasm between the native and white races had been broadening for years and that the efforts of the administration—especially since the grant of responsible government—to reconcile the Kaffirs to the changed conditions of rule and policy and to convert them into an element of strength had been ineffective. It was not sufficient to secure them, as the government had done, peace and ample means of livelihood. The commission among other proposals for a more liberal and sympathetic native policy urged the creation of a native advisory Board entrusted with very wide powers. “Personal rule,” they declared, “supplies the keynote of successful native control”—a statement amply borne out by the influence over the natives exercised by Sir T. Shepstone. The unrest in Zululand delayed action being taken on the commission’s report. But in 1909 an act was passed which placed native affairs in the hands of four district commissioners, gave to the minister for native affairs direct executive authority and created a council for native affairs on which non-official members had seats. While the district commissioners were intended to keep in close touch with the natives, the council was to act as a “deliberative, consultative and advisory body.”
Concurrently with the efforts made to reorganize their native policy the colony also endeavoured to deal with the Asiatic question. The rapid growth of the Indian population from about 1890 caused much disquiet among the majority of the white inhabitants, who viewed with especial anxiety the activities of the “free,” i.e. unindentured Indians. An act of 1895, which did not become effective until 1901, imposed an annual tax of £3 Restrictions on Indians. on time-expired Indians who remained in the colony and did not reindenture. In 1897 an Indian Immigration Restriction Act was passed with the object of protecting European traders; in 1903 another Immigration Restriction Act among other things, permitted the exclusion of all would-be immigrants unable to write in the characters of some European language. Under this act thousands of Asiatics were refused permission to land. In 1906 municipal disabilities were imposed upon Asiatics, and in 1907 a Dealers’ Licences Act was passed with the object, and effect, of restricting the trading operations of Indians. In 1908 the government introduced a bill to provide for the cessation of Indian emigration at the end of three years; it was not proceeded with, but a strong commission was appointed to inquire into the whole subject. This commission reported in 1909, its general conclusion being that in the interests of Natal the importation of indentured Indian labour should not be discontinued. For sugar, tea and wattle growing, farming, coal-mining and other industries indentured Indian labour appeared to be essential. But the evidence was practically unanimous that the Indian was undesirable in Natal other than as a labourer and the commission recommended compulsory repatriation. While desirous that steps should be taken to prevent an increase in the number of free Asiatic colonists, the commission pointed out that there were in Natal over 60,000 “free” Indians whose rights could not be interfered with by legislation dealing with the further importation of coolies. But these Indians by reindenturing might come under the operation of the repatriation proposal. Nothing further was done in Natal up to the establishment of the Union of South Africa, when all questions specially or differentially affecting Asiatics were withdrawn from the competence of the provincial authorities.
Not long after the conclusion of the war of 1899–1902 the close commercial relations between the Transvaal and Natal led to suggestions for a union of the two colonies, but these suggestions were not seriously entertained. The divergent interests of the various colonies threatened indeed a tariff and railway war when the Customs The movement for union. Convention (provisionally renewed in March 1906) should expire in 1908. But at the close of 1906 the Cape ministry formally reopened the question of federation, and at a railway conference held in Pretoria in May 1908 the Natal delegates agreed to a motion affirming the desirability of the early union of the self-governing colonies. The movement for union rapidly gained strength, and a National Convention to consider the matter met in Durban in October 1908. In Natal, especially among the older colonists, who feared that in a united South Africa Natal interests would be overborne, the proposals for union were met with suspicion and opposition, and the Natal ministry felt bound to submit the question to the people. A referendum act was passed in April 1909, and in June following the electors by 11,121 votes to 3701 decided to join the Union. (See South Africa.)
Natal was concerned not only with the political aspects of union, and with its natives and Indian problems, but had to safeguard its commercial interests and to deal with a revenue insufficient for its needs. In 1908 an Income Tax and a Land Tax Act was passed; the land tax being a halfpenny in the £ “on the aggregate unimproved value”—it brought in £30,000 in 1908–1909. Meantime it was agreed by the Cape, Transvaal and Natal governments that, subject to Natal entering the Union, its share of the Rand import trade should be 25% before and 30% after the establishment of the Union. Previously Natal had only 2212% of the traffic, and this agreement led to a revival in trade. Moreover, the development of its coal-mines and agriculture was vigorously prosecuted, and in 1910 it was found possible to abolish both the Income Tax and Land Tax and yet have a surplus in revenue. The closing months of Natal’s existence as a separate colony thus found her peaceful and prosperous. The governor, Sir Matthew Nathan, had
- ↑ The causes, both local and general, are set forth in a despatch by the governor of the 21st of June 1906 and printed in the Blue Book, Cd. 3247.
