Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:35:33.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Transvaal Labour Crisis, 1901—6*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2009

D. J. N. Denoon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the crucial reasons for the failure of British policy in South Africa during the Reconstruction period was an acute shortage of African labour for the mines, which were therefore unable to support a large English-speaking immigrant community. According to the prevailing economic beliefs, there was a fairly rigid ratio between the numbers of unskilled coloured workers and of skilled white workers which the mines could employ, so that the scarcity of African labour did inhibit the mines from expanding their white labour force.

The reasons for this scarcity include the deplorable physical conditions in which labourers lived and worked, and the unusually large demands for African labour in other sectors of the economy. British policy also, inadvertently, put less pressure on Transvaal Africans to take industrial or agricultural employment. However, the scarcity of labour was noticeable not only within British South Africa, but more especially outside its borders, where Africans seem to have been more reluctant than usual to take employment in the mines. It is possible to argue that the shortage was caused partly by the disillusionment of the workers as a result of their experience of British administration, and partly by a fairly extensive determination to withhold labour until conditions were improved. Such an interpretation is compatible with the facts of the case, though impossible at this stage to prove.

Whatever the reasons for the scarcity, the result was the importation of Chinese labour to supplement the existing unskilled labour force. The well-documented complaints of the Chinese labour throw some light on the treatment of African labour. The Chinese also undercut the wages paid to Africans, who lost their commanding position as unconscious arbiters of the success of mining. Further, the Chinese were employed in terms of a very restrictive contract, whose terms were later extended to cover African labour as well, with the result that the industrial colour-bar was solidified at a time when white labour was in control of an unusually large area of employment.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of African History , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , November 1967 , pp. 481 - 494
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Birmingham University Library, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, J.C. 10/9. High Commissioner Mimer to Chamberlain, private, 23 Aug. 99.Google Scholar

2 Colonial Office files 417/326, 42283—Milner to Chamberlain, 8 Nov. 1901, and comments by F. Graham of the Colonial Office Staff.Google Scholar

3 Transvaal archives, governor's private secretary group, P. S. 76, vol. 211 of 1905: Department of Mines Statistics.Google Scholar

4 For example, Fitzpatrick, J. P., The Transvaal from Within (1899 ed.), 105 ff.Google Scholar

5 C.O. 417/294, 35879—Imperial Secretary Perry to Chamberlain, 17 Oct. 1900, sending articles of association of the W.N.L.A.: and comments by G. V. Fiddes.Google Scholar

6 Cd 1904 (xxxix), 1897. Evidence before the Transvaal Labour Commission, exhibit no. 1.Google Scholar

7 Governor, P.S. 53, vol. 32 of 1901. Milner to G. G. Robinson, 12 Dec. 1901 statistics.Google Scholar

8 W.N.L.A. report for 1903.Google Scholar

9 Cape Government publication, 12 of 1904, p. 99. Report by Cape Government Railway Protector of Natives, 30 Sept. 1904. Cf. Labour Commission, evidence of Chief N. C. Unhalla of King William's Town, Q.13,613.Google Scholar

10 Legislative Council debates, 5th session, col. 2060 et seq.Google Scholar

11 Cd 2401 (iv), 1905, appendix 11. Native Commissioner's report for 1903–4, 31 Aug. 1904.Google Scholar

12 C.O. 291/55, 12945. Report by Transvaal Native Refugee Department.Google Scholar

13 Governor, P. S. 53, vol. 32 of 1901. General Manager W.N.L.A. to Chairman, W.N.L.A., 6 Dec. 1901. Cf. Colonial Treasurer, 289 J.L. 210, Leggett to Duncan, 29 July 1903, forwarding opinion of Assistant Resident Magistrate Pretoria; and Labour Cornmission evidence of Generals de Ia Rey and Cronje.Google Scholar

14 Transvaal Law Reports, 12 and 20 Nov. 1902, Supreme Court, Eastwood v. Shepstone;Google Scholaribid, Oct. 1903, Masilia and others v. Sub-Commissioner at Pietersburg and Israelsohns.

15 Land department annual reports: 1903–4 in Cd 1905 (lv), 2482; 1904–5 in Cd (lxxx), 3028.Google Scholar

16 South African Native Affairs Commission, vol 4, Evidence of Transvaal Landowners' Association, p. 834.Google Scholar

17 Transvaal Labour Commission, evidence of H. L. Hall, QQ 4,660–4,670; evidence of Secretary Native Affairs Dept. QQ 5,702–3; S.A.N.A.C. vol 4, evidence of E. H. Hogge, Q 40,059.Google Scholar

18 Cd. 1906 (LXXX), 2819, enclosure 1 in 54. Territorial analysis, 30 Nov. 1905.Google Scholar

19 C.O. 375 19–Milner to Chamberlain, 8 Sept. 1902. I am much indebted to James Duffy for information in his Portuguese Africa (1959).Google Scholar

20 C.O. 417/368, 45090—Notes by G. V. Fiddes of interview dated 14. Nov. 1902.Google Scholar

21 Chamber of Mines annual reports and monthly Executive Committee reports.Google Scholar

22 C.O. 291/58, 32432—Lt.-Governor Lawley to Chamberlain, 7 Aug. 1903.Google Scholar

23 C.O. 457/403—Foreign Office to Colonial Office, 30 Jan. 1904.Google Scholar

24 C.O. 417/331—Foreign Office to Colonial Office, 22 Apr. 1901.Google Scholar

25 C.O. 291/47, 36082—Milner to Chamberlain, 28 Aug. 1902; and Foreign Office to Colonial Office, 29 Aug. 1902.Google Scholar

26 C.O. 417/359, 34009 and 34626—Foreign Office to Colonial Office, enclosing copies of Casement's dispatches from the Congo during 1902.Google Scholar

27 Rhodes House Library, Lagden Papers: MSS. Afr. s. 174—Lagden to J. A. Spender, 18 Dec. 1901.Google Scholar

28 S.A.N.A.C., vol. 4, evidence of nine chiefs, pp. 649–52 and 715–18.Google Scholar

29 South African Public Library newspaper collection: Koranta ea Becoana, 30 Mar. 1904, quoting Native Eye, edited by Khomo, of which no copies seem to survive. The African Press in East London was similarly pre-occupied with imperial-republican comparisons.Google Scholar

30 S.A.N.A.C., vol. 4, evidence of Africans resident in Pretoria.Google Scholar

31 For example, Lieutenant-Governor group, Lt.G.109, 105/9—Petition from Iliso Lomzi (Native Vigilance Society) 14 July 1903;Google ScholarC.O. 291/81, 15332—Lawley to Lyttelton 17 April 1905, forwarding petition;Google ScholarConfidential Colonial Office print, African South, 879/89—Selbome to Elgin, 4 Aug. 1906, and enclosures.Google Scholar

32 Engineers, Royal, Detailed History of the Railways in the South African War, 1, 257 ff.Google Scholar

33 C.O. 291/56, 14308—Report on town police for 1902.Google Scholar

34 Times History of the War in South Africa, VI, 595;Google ScholarBatts, H. J., Pretoria from Within, 192.Google Scholar

35 Transvaal Archives, Military Governor's Political Secretary group, memorandum by Marwick, J. to Military Governor, Pretoria, 6 Mar. 1901.Google Scholar

36 CO. 291/82, 16165—Lawley to Lyttelton, 20 Apr. 1905: Native Affairs Statistics.Google Scholar

37 Chamber of Mines Confidential Circulars to Mine Managers, 28 and 30 Nov. 1903. The trend was sufficiently alarming to warrant the appointment of an economist to enquire.Google Scholar

38 Cd 1904 (lxii) 2025, enclosure in 13—Lagden's report for year ending 30 June 1903.Google Scholar

39 S.A.N.A.C. vol. 4—evidence of T. MacFarlane, General Manager W.N.L.A., p. 735.Google Scholar

40 Chamber of Mines, annual report for 1902, and Executive Committee monthly reports. In the revised scale, scope was allowed for discriminating against Mocambique labourers, which suggests that the Chamber was particularly concerned to increase other supplies.Google Scholar

41 Governor P.S. 76, vol. 211 of 1905, Selborne's undated memorandum for the Chamber. The presence of Australian ex-servicemen on the Rand added point to the fear.Google Scholar

42 C.O. 291/53, 47226—Copy of H. H. Webb to Rudd, 1 Oct. 1902.Google Scholar

43 Transvaal Legislative Council debates, 1903, include an historical summary. Nonwhite engine-winders were an early casualty: the Mines and Works act itself merely enabled the government to reserve occupations simply through regulations.Google Scholar

44 van der Horst, S. T., Native Labour in South Africa, 172;Google ScholarThompson, L. M., Unification of South Africa, 14, concurs.Google Scholar

45 C.O. 29 1/79. 1224—notes on draft Labour Importation Ordinance by Sir F. Swettenham.Google Scholar

46 CO. 291/90. 21961—copies of reports from H. M. Consul, Kuangtung, 28 Apr. 1905.Google Scholar

47 For example, Cd 1906 (lxxx), 2819, no. 39—Selborne to Elgin, 30 Dec. 1905.Google Scholar

48 C.O. 291/84, 25699—Selborne to Lyttelton, 21 July 1905.Google Scholar

49 Chamber of Mines archives, ch. 58—Bagot to G. G. Robinson, is Nov. 1904. Robinson, as Geoffrey Dawson, was subsequently editor of the Johannesburg Star and The Times.Google Scholar

50 Governor P.S. 37, vol. 194 of 1905—copy of Farrar Bros. to Chamber of Mines, 18 Feb. 1905.Google Scholar

51 Cd 1906 (lxxx), 2819, enclosure in 70—report on gold mines for 1905.Google Scholar

52 Chamber of Mines archives, ch. 58—Evans to Chamber, 20 July and 18 August 1904;Google Scholar and Governor P.S. 37, vol. 194 of 1905—Meeting of Evans and the Chamber, 3 February 1905.Google Scholar

53 C.O. 291/83, 27963—Selborne to Lyttelton, 17 July 1905.Google Scholar

54 Governor P.S. 7, vol. 192 of 1905—G. W. Murray's report dated 5 Apr. 1905.Google Scholar

55 Cd 1906 (lxxx), 2786, enclosure in 28—return presented by Transvaal Attorney General, 4 Sept. 1905.Google Scholar

56 Cd 1905 (lv), 2405, no. 41—Milner to Lyttelton, 30 Jan. 1905.Google Scholar

57 S.A.N.A.C. vol 4—evidence of T. E. Mavrogordato, C.I.D. Q 44,548.Google Scholar

58 Governor P.S. 50, vol. 202 of 1905—Chamber of Mines to Milner's private secretary 25 Jan. 1905; and Cd 1906 (lxxx), 2859, enclosure in 70—report on gold mines for 1905.Google Scholar

59 Governor P.S. 50, vol. 202 of 1905—copy of H. Strange to Drummond Chaplin, 20 Feb. 1905;Google Scholarvan der Host, S.T., op cit. 168, 200 ff.Google Scholar