^{page 324 note 1} Hunter, M., Reaction to Conquest, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 2} The detailed results are embodied in ‘A Socioeconomic Study of East London …’, A Master's thesis: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, C.P.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 3} There are now three locations in East London, The West Bank Location, the first to be started, remains today as a community of about 350 houses. The Cambridge Location, of about 100 houses, was incorporated after the amalgamation of the city with the suburb of that name in 1942. The East Bank Location is the largest and is the centre of the present study.

^{page 324 note 4} In view of the interest shown in the recently introduced Group Areas Act, whereby each racial group is allotted its own particular area of residence and business, it is important to note that in East London the African people on the whole presented no problem to the group planners. The African area of settlement was determined as early as 1885 and, with the exception of a few wealthy and/or educated persons, all lived in those areas. East London's problem in terms of the Act was the allocation of areas for the Coloured, Indian, Malay, and Chinese peoples. These groups, as well as many Europeans, tended to live in the interstitial zone between the African location and the area wholely used by Europeans. This area is known as North End, is extensively built over, and might be described as ‘blighted’.

^{page 325 note 1} It must be borne in mind that the geographical position of East London made it an excellent place to work in for short periods. It was within a day's walking distance from a number of large, rural reserve areas. Costly train fares, such as those involved in going to the Kimberley diamond-mines, the Johannesburg gold-mines, or the sugar estates of Natal, were non-existent. Although wages in East London tended to be lower than elsewhere, the City was readily accessible to fill the gaps between work in the centres farther afield.

^{page 325 note 2} The incentive to review this matter was the increasing deficit on the Native Revenue Account.

^{page 325 note 3} Unfortunately this matter has not yet received the attention it deserves. What occurred, for example, when a polygynously married man brought all his wives to town is not known. In theory each wife would receive one room. But such instances must have been rare, as a man with a plurality of wives, implying a degree of wealth, would rarely come to town for anything but a short visit, in which case his wives would remain behind.

^{page 326 note 1} Room letting was a financially remunerative undertaking, and often enabled an owner to earn sufficient to save him from going out to work—an ambition of many an African.

^{page 327 note 1} Whereas it is true that the traditional South Nguni hut was round, it is false to assume that a family lived in only one house; in practice it had at least three or four. This European belief coincided with the contemporary belief in the irregular sex habits of the primitive.

^{page 328 note 1} Registering a house in the name of a woman may have resulted from the custom of the Southern Nguni whereby a woman was provided with a hut and land of her own and settled more or less as an independent economic unit vis à vis other wives in the polygynous household. A man in the habit of migrating regularly to East London may have taken a wife in town in addition to those in the country.

In such an event she would have been provided with a house of her own, which would at the same time make her economically independent. There is as yet no proof that this ever occurred.

^{page 328 note 2} Under the terms on which the loan was made, on a sub-economic basis, the City Council had to suffer a pro rata portion of the loss.