“III-I-“-----u--—- THE AFRiKANERS EN KENYA 1903 - 1959 Bissertafion for the Degree at 3%. D. EQICEEGAN SMTE URWERS‘IT‘! GERRIT GROEN 1 9 7 4 "WWMWWWHWH L if; L’.-..'-.". a“; f. if ‘ 9‘ ,1», Fur!” ' "-91 N” “J This 15 to certify th ' .'. '- J ‘ thesis entitled ’ 5‘35 The Afrikaners in Kenya, 1903-1969. presented by Gerrit D. Green has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. History degree in “(Q/721% Major pxofessor Date January 10; 1971; . - \..' 0-7639 3‘ .‘ nu: the fan: . _. A “China fir ' Y" "4,. fi colonized 12-mi- ' u .13 n, 42‘; H“ w ' ., , 'O‘ fihacc rc-qt; 9 gm ,,. . ,‘ «a. ' . .md to «5.1-1: ;.-21:’.‘~~'3_, "1 ‘8“.1.’ . V “It Africa ix}? any ,,.,,1,‘3 ‘u.1 lands 1"): ' "n’:"‘$"l in Vr‘ ht boon ac'rmml o: 0311.412». - .1 - r .- the wax preterm: St‘x'im main. -~ i '"o: H:- indignities whim .14,” MM.“ ““1,“ follow All uncut. after the um: .. mo fineopuon in me anion mu Nude ‘I h min welcomed the Mums“ but. . 4,» fining tho lulu-1906 ported Mme-our“ ind-“M mny halt of the interim mu mm or trot: north-nud- men “gfi‘: ;>-l~k: .AK ‘16 '38 "4., '. {wants -‘ ABSTRACT *. .G.‘(P_- :Efllishu. ~ . ms AFRIKANERS IN KENYA ‘ 1903-1969 .‘per:ia '. . B I ; t .v ‘ Y 4 1 Gerrit Groen ‘ O: . .[I .7. - éaf‘v :x_§1 ' After the 1899-1902 Anglo—Boer War, many Afrikaners '. sic" p.933 searching for other lands in which they could settle. \ea“ r,, 59’ newly colonized regions of East Africa beckoned a ’imlber of these restive people. A few of the potential ttlers hoped to establish politically autonomous states German East Africa but many were searching for inexpen- ,' :Ic...‘l.". 1- we agricultural lands for themselves and their children. . e ‘ ,I‘who had been accused of collaboration with the ) “LA ‘. ‘Qf.h -during the war preferred living under British rule \IM: .9; than suffer the indignities which were being heaped Tithem by their fellow Afrikaners after the war. l; 59¢; trekked out of an inner psychological need. ' u The Afrikaners' reception in East Africa was mixed. ' no it: "W 68784! Jig-'5‘ ‘1. ~ Gerrit Groen British East Africa. The British Administration was also reluctant to grant land to these migrants and only responded to their needs when they were joined by the substantial Van Rensburg Trek in 1908. After considerable negotiations between administrative officials and Van Rensburg, the Afrikaners were permitted to settle on the Uasin Gishu Plateau two hundred miles northwest of Nairobi. Though joined on the Uasin Gishu by an equal number of non-Afrikaner settlers, the Afrikaners strongly resisted any assimilationist tendencies. Congregations of the three Dutch Reformed denominations of South Africa were quickly established and private Afrikaans schools were formed by the first permanent clergyman, 05. M. P. Loubser. English government-supported farm schools served the many families who could not afford the modest fees of these private schools. Two leaders emerged during this early period who ably represented the Afrikaners in colony-wide organi- zations, C. J. Cloete and A. F. Arnoldi. Unfortunately Cloete died of disease in 1912 and Arnoldi was killed leading a number of Afrikaners in battle against the Ger— mans in 1915. The deaths of these men left the Afrikaners with no leaders during the inter-war period who were respected outside their own community. The absence of such leadership and the general poverty of the community retarded the British settlers' acceptance of the Afrikaners and encouraged the continuation of traditional '- _. ‘s.\ razl a“. AmJ cart] erlty doe. ~CZ‘-: he: a '- H~Ja -.'. e (‘F‘Ihs'p 1 E a ner- vv-sb.‘ - . o .3 -0. .3.. '-~oes-’ - Jinn- ‘evbh 51c en- hue“ ”J‘s-y“. 4”,; iol“ “V‘ C‘. ne- >- 1; 53:30 F“ 1“ h H s";‘s‘a fis;Sta 2 o on Gerrit Groen British-Afrikaner antagonisms. Nevertheless the Education Department was able to centralize all education on the Plateau in an English Eldoret Central School by 1939. Many British parents refused to send their children to this integrated school; thus in 1944 a second Eldoret school was begun for them. The economic condition of the community improved considerably in the late 19303. The liberal credit policies of the administration, the opening of new areas for settle- ment, particularly south of Thomson's Falls, and higher grain prices were the primary reasons for this improvement. Prosperity fostered greater political awareness and in 1939 the community elected its first Member of Legislative Council. But prosperity also engendered ideological division--division which followed geographical lines. The older Uasin Gishu community had lost its will to resist further anglicization after World War II and it passively accepted the amalgamation of the two ethnically-divided schools in Eldoret in 1956. In contrast the newer and more prosperous Thomson's Falls community used its wealth to begin a private school in 1947 and parlayed it into a substantial boarding school by 1952 with governmental assistance and South African support. Had colonialism per- sisted the two divisions of the community would probably have grown farther apart but the assurance of independence at Lancaster House in 1960 removed all concern for such parochial matters. Immediately Afrikaners began selling ‘al .‘r-O O!- a: k {53537.5 e 652' '. ou- Out 995,-... V1 3.; final; e perrane - h ‘Q .eath ...S Ow - .I" Gerrit Groen their land and the trek back to South Africa commenced. By 1969 only a few remained in Kenya, and of these, only two families had become Kenyan citizens with intent to stay indefinitely. Though these settlers migrated to East Africa for reasons which were individually arrived at, their nation- alist clergyman Ds. Loubser viewed this community as the vanguard of Afrikaner expansionism on the African continent. In the early 19205 he declared all of Africa to be his vaderland and contended that the entire continent should eventually fall into Afrikaner hands. He strongly opposed and feared European colonialism and Asian (Indian) settle- ment but he did not consider these historical movements to be permanent obstacles to his nationalist goals. Before his death in 1936 he did not foresee that the nascent force of African nationalism would overpower both of the above two forces. It was this last force which caused the retreat of Afrikanerdom from East Africa. m MRIKANERS IN KENYA 1903-1969 By Gerrit Groen A DISSERTATION Submitud to Inchigan State University a1 fulfillment of the fm'evmiraments thadagm of DOCTOR 0’ 'PIIIDSO’B! Depart-int of History 1970 n":-‘ ‘ ffi-uv,; "1_. vJ-ty .. ‘.. ‘- .. ‘ A-.. .- .. "34‘ Pg '~.\.\“ d.. V,“ ‘ 4 .1 — "1'. ' ' This a» ‘CUII I097 sougnr—. {on Booker. .';9hillai and Cflkfluh“' s} ”I“ It"!!! r‘ :‘uo. ' .. ' _ -‘-‘. Iftican Studisg "9'- In Africa, , \' .-V . considerably r; :ahtt'. .>;~n gm). Arv:h'.":~:-. 7* 9'0 .- u encouraging luring a} «in. n "ur- m i “tional Archives were an; "t‘ - _, Anti: the Reverend I c. A an x.:2 - »a i.‘ Transvaal flederdditta Sarcanqu.Loe ‘“-- .k‘uth '-«a'~.$ 3 .t'tosis. showed intarsst in th- nmvtahzm fi; b“’QOI the archives of the Indeedu ma - ‘wrvwr. - [I I s‘ S ”H ‘au w. a\ 1 a .9 .3 . .c. .. a f F L. Y 1 X . .Y‘ . . a p 2 2 a . u c e ,1 C . l . a "H“ s d *s 8 Mb I “a "H“ ”I.“ e ‘4' “K I e . T . i a a c i t... i u... A: HIV ‘ é Ow —- o A . h c t a. l a S E S e :1 a. Z. t .. . C . . ... . u a. c . I S T. a 1 C .3 f z .3 Z I 2 e a. a. . i E f I T. ... ... .3 a u .u. a. n. v. 7. ‘5. L» a. 2‘ a: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation was accomplished with assistance from many sources. At Michigan State University, Professor James Hooker, my graduate advisor, was a constant source of advice and encouragement. Professors Harold Marcus and Donald Lammers helped to mold the final copy into its present form. The research was made possibly by a National Defense Foreign Area Fellowship and a Michigan State Uni- versity African Studies Center Grant. In Africa, the Kenyan Government expedited my research considerably by granting permission to use the Kenyan National Archives.. Professors Bethwell A. Ogot and Alan H. Jacobs of the University of Nairobi were very helpful and encouraging during my stay in Kenya. The staff of the Kenya National Archives were most obliging. Similarly the Reverend F. G. M. Du Toit of the archives of the Transvaal Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk and Mr. H. Rex of the archives of the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk, both in Pretoria, showed interest in the completion of this study. ii I ‘ ‘ :srg.e:ec 'a‘. . . nap-mu \ n "mu..- a1 as i: , ‘fiuny. this dissertation would not have been ' L without the loyal swport and considerable assistance of my wife, Dawn. , ‘1,- ._:. .. \ mm“ 9;... “W‘s. 1.001 MI?“ um *' t“ .. -. . "V gnacmzcr ( - I “(as 00mm; . 14.4 . BLM‘Icuw t“l. 3"» ~- ~ . f" 13: P “."i i- M‘isimnmz. :‘u. ' ‘ x14". ' KY . . . . . . . , . g' I" '1' Ir;- ‘°~q fl.“ srp. \ '5 in. "‘" Vt nan-a. pl 2" r m-y' . O 9—4 r— a 3" .7 1 I W ' ‘.. “v~ f" \. ‘ IT I‘. S'V/\ gx F IN- 'N ._ ., V 1‘. F; . “ \ 3;;tr‘W-s.‘ ”VaLJ : ~ TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . v Chapter I. GREENER PASTURES IN EAST AFRICA: AFRIKANERS LOOK NORTHWARDS 1902-06 . . . . . . . 1 II. VERGENOEG: SETTLEMENT OF UASIN GISHU PLATEAU, 1904-10. s e a e e s e s s 39 III. THE COMMUNITY PERSISTS: PATTERNS OF RELATIONSHIPS ESTABLISHED: 1910-18 . . . 64 IV. NADIR: POVERTY CONTINUED AND INFLUENCE DECLINED, 1918-40 . . . . . . . . . 121 V. AFRIKANER FRONTIER: STRUGGLE TO RETAIN CULTURAL INTEGRITY, 1918-40 . . . . . . 157 VI. SUCCESS: PERIOD OF ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CULTURAL DILEMMA: 1940-60 . . . . . . 210 VII. FAILURE: EMIGRATION FROM KENYA: 1960-69 . . 254 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . 267 APPENDICES Appendix A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 Appendix B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 Appendix C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 MAP 0 I I o a e a e a a e a e a s O a 296 iv hot, 0-. V ‘d ‘P 5-! t I In gm 0 C) (D O o x ‘v «I BEA C0 D3. PO GEA LBEA NGK LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS British East Africa Great Britain Colonial Office District Commissioner Abbreviation for Dominus, Afrikaans title for clergyman. Egg; African Standard Great Britain Foreign Office German East Africa Gereformeerde Kerk Kenya National Archives Leader of British East Africa Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk Uasin Gishu fihv-n gin-a- ,1. lr“ . j -1, . L i; “w 11:4 . 1“ Jr. N. 130‘ I _ n CHAPTER I GREENER PASTURES IN EAST AFRICA: AFRIKANERS LOOK NORTHWARDS 1902-06 The last two decades of the nineteenth century witnessed a crescendo of interest in East Africa by the European colonial powers. Before the century ended most of the territory had been divided among the powers, with Germany and Britain controlling the central portion of the coast with its climatically temperate highlands regions. In order to consolidate their holds on their respective regions, both powers initially welcomed the immigration of Europeans. Consequently, during the early years of this century, many individuals and groups con- sidered settlement and a modest number of settlers began the Europeanization of both British and German East Africa. But European attitudes towards unrestricted settlement of non-European sections of the globe had changed from the nineteenth century. The German Government reflected these changes first when its newly constituted Colonial Ministry had Dr. Bernhard Dernburg appointed as its first minister in 1906. Dr. Dernburg "opposed the ruthless exploitation :i the rate: .v. 9.: Ubtn , . . e r.«. c.1_~ .uevll av AJ‘ grepean set Iv‘l I ‘ Cu,“ 1‘ Indy-i u gri'L“ "t in '-‘au.:‘ IAQIAH I am. . ’P‘? -b ~n =.'3‘e: I t: . a»...e: . A! , . 5d; PIC‘C" 'v. . . I n- .aess 1' l .4 :f“ 8..“ a. ‘ Jr b. V s. "City a ;_ ‘ ‘. I. \. “C‘h. ‘a.,,. .. 1 for the benefit of a few Europeans." The change in policy ‘ of the material and human resources of overseas territories 1 which followed Dernburg's appointment effectively stopped I 0 European settlement in German East Africa.2 The Foreign Office administration in BEA followed a much different policy line. Pointing to the costs of maintaining the Uganda Railway which the British had built for strategic reasons, M. P. K. Sorrenson has stated: Above all, these financial problems had to be solved if the Foreign Office was to be spared from continuous criticism in the Commons. It was for this reason that the Foreign Office was to grasp at any settlement expedient that seemed likely to reduce the financial burdens of the British taxpayer.3 When Sir Charles Eliot became Commissioner of BEA in 1901, he consistently encouraged the migration of European settlers into what became known as the "Highlands." Not only did he encourage resident South Africans, such as Robert Chamberlain and A. S. Flemmer, to lead settlers to the Protectorate, but he also sent his Collector of Customs, 1W. 0. Henderson, "German East Africa, 1884-1918," Histo gf East Africa, edited by Vincent Harlow, E. M. CHIIver, and aSSLSted by Alison Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), p. 147. I i f 2Hereafter GEA. British East Africa will be called BEA or the Protectorate until 1920, when it became Kenya Colony. 3 - . . M. P. K. Sorrenson, Origins of European Settlement in Kenya (London: Oxford Universrty Press, ). p. . ”I. ” _ ...€ werybun r sat-v.1. .‘.. b- l. 3:2: 'n'ar a: . , . F‘R 5 W ”F ”1“ vauSC.‘ 17.";Vf'csrn- : .jvosvz . . "‘"v r ’ abgu.. S‘s, up; ‘ , a I. ' U ‘k’ 1 t“ “an“ . 5-». rs : 6 In} . .......,55 a . “ ; I “Jan C' I. an ID ."1 <1 1.)) _‘J — “e {’31. ‘l M.. C‘ O L “Jx‘ecrj.‘ A. Marsden, to South Africa to promote his immigration schemes.4 The invitation to settle in East Africa came at an opportune moment in South Africa. The end of the Anglo- Boer War and the withdrawal of British troops from the area had caused a serious depression. Economic recovery was hindered by the devastation caused by Kitchener's counter- insurgency warfare.5 Certain British elements of South African society were amenable to Eliot's blandishments and, by the end of 1903, there was a steady stream of settlers from the "South," as it was called, to the port of Mombasa.6 This migration determined the historic South African character of settler politics in Kenya.7 The British immigrants expected to enter a land with a more amenable political and economic climate: "the war [in 4Ibid., pp. 61-66; G. a. Mungeam, British Rule in Kenya, 1895-I912 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, , p. 104; an ariorie Ruth Dilley, British Poli in Ken a Colony (London: Frank Cass & Co. Ltd., 1 , p. 13. 5See L. M. Thompson, The Unification of South Africa (Oxford: Clarendon Press, , pp. - 7 . H. L. re May, British Su rema in South Africa; 1899-1907 (Oxford: CIaren on Press,_I9355, p. 6W. McGregor Ross, Ken a from Within (London: Prank Cass & Co., 1968). p. 34 C. W. HoEIey, Ken a from Chartered Com an 22 Crown Colony (London: FranE Cass & 0., ), p. IE9. 7Sorrenson, European Settlement, p. 67. --~ -- be JadeCt b. 1:7;f‘ r5, ”QACU as 1“"?“8‘ \l f‘ 4 uadvu‘Q V‘s "u-.J‘_‘.C : s ‘ .‘ F: e H” ‘ a. ..tec 6 .v ‘.V V‘IHEF:7" South Africa] had served merely to consolidate the monopo- lies of the mining magnates."8 The Afrikaners who migrated to East Africa were subject to the same economic pressures as the British South Africans, but their condition was worse because of the destruction of many of their farms and villages.9 Things were going from bad to worse in this country, and . . . it would be necessary for distressed people to look for "fresh fields and pastures new." . . . These people must go somewhere. They have been ruined through the war. . . . Starvation stared certain people in the face6 and they must seek new fields to make a living in.1 Some of the Afrikaners recognized that the Anglo- Boer War was not totally responsible for South Africa's economic plight. Members of the Abraham Joubert Trek admitted that they were dissatisfied with the closing of the frontier in South Africa and sought new areas of wide open spaces. In their words, they felt that the farms were becoming "too small,"11 and they believed that there were 8Ibid., p. 65. 9Le May, British Su remac , pp. 88-93; and C. F. J. Muller, ed., Five Hundred Years; A Histo of South Africa (Pretoria: Academia, I9395, pp. 520-2I. 10African Standard, July 30, 1904, p. 2. 11A. L. Aucamp, "Die Trek van die Afrikaners na Xenia,” ”Die Abraham Joubert Trek," narrated to Aucamp on September 28, 1935; and "Tant Nakkie Potgieter se Geskiedenis," narrated to Aucamp on July 24, 1958. These documents are found in manuscript form in the University of RDtchefstroom library. The evidence presented here was also verified by a number of interviewees of the author. ‘ “V III-0 :1:e.1 Lud- - ii;lv\ '56. Chic! nu .- s E36581: a: “’5‘ 3 y: as a I-ldb ".2 N! p. _ on... :“a e ," u-Lsrga‘hE pr 46: ‘. “meal “ . I IL" 'Gn r us.‘~‘ L4 ‘: '\ ~ ‘ .F . ”or ‘I‘Au : [’5‘ I {:46‘9-.r ‘ .IO '1 J . w 4 “1;. Var? H 7 h “EJ‘H- _ s 5‘ d 0‘5.» w six... QLQ‘ ~ fl 'H ! h“"e~0 : ‘4 ‘ large farms to be had in East Africa for modest sums of money.12 In the late 19405 a clergyman in East Africa summed up his observations concerning the reasons for the trek by saying: "The base motive for the trek was defi- nitely materialistic," but added that the desire to be independent, so prevalent in the Afrikaner community, was present among those who trekked.13 The desire to be independent was a contributing factor to the migration of Afrikaners to East Africa, but, as a motivation, it was applicable only to the first group that migrated to GEA. Doubtlessly some South Africans entertained thoughts about migrating because of British political domination of their territory. A letter to the editor of 22 Volkstem declared that the country was con- trolled by foreigners who were preventing the lessons of Afrikaner history from being taught to the Afrikaner people--therefore, trek, not within colonial Africa but to free Argentina and Mexico.14 Similarly a popular South 12co 879/99, No. 914, serial no. 281, Governor of Transvaal to Secretary of State, August 3, 1908. This report also recorded the number of families which left from each district: 91 from Bethal, 37 from Carolina, 29 from Ermelo and 4 from Standerton. A few had already returned. These are exaggerated figures. 13Phil Olivier, ”Kenia," Die Kerkbode, Deel LXIII, No. 6, February 9, 1949, p. 359. 14Though no scholarly work has been done on the trekkers to these countries, it is common knowledge among historians of South Africa, particularly Afrikaner histo- 1.lens, that some Afrikaners did indeed trek to these two v '7‘ “War: ‘6... u-ueebv I """ W510 4.5. 3:119: IE: Ah” ~..T.t[ieS my! 1:. iecaje of 51131?» cf \ ~ '6‘; Alyeuhgrf: 115.. 19: “s. "£01739: ‘3‘": he 17' “5:131”: r Vi African writer, Lawrence G. Green, claimed that the Afri- kaners who settled in GEA "seem to have been under the impression that they would be able to set up a republic in 15 This the empty country round about the great mountains." claim would seem to be verified by a report in the African Standard concerning a group who approached the German Consul in Pretoria with a number of demands with which Berlin would have to comply before the group would travel to GEA. They requested a charter granting them a defined area of land for which they would pay an annual rent and within which they would have self—government.16 Though the German Government never agreed to such terms, a later Afrikaner writer reported that some settlers claimed that they had countries. This writer saw a number of reports on the com- munity in Argentina in the Afrikaans press of the first decade of this century. Sheila Patterson mentions this flight of the ”bitter-enders" to Portuguese Angola and the Argentine. The Last Trek (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1957). pp. 55-36. 15Lawrence G. Green, Great North Road (Capetown: Howard Timmins, 1961), p. 171. Green does Have inaccuracies in his book, such as claiming that M. P. Loubser arrived in . East Africa in 1905 and attempted to set up a united Dutch L Reformed Church. See p. 27. He does not document his work I but he implied in the text that the source of his infor- mation on these matters was Sangiro, a popular naturalist writer in South Africa, who moved to GEA as a child with his parents. Sangiro is the pen name for A. A. Pienaar. . 16African Standard, July 30, 1904, p. 2. This writer was unaEIe to iscover if this group of prospective settlers did in fact migrate to GEA or if any members of the group became part of other groups of trekkers. Since there was no follow-up story in any of the newspapers Perused, it would seem that the group itself under the leadership of Mr. Barend Vorster never did migrate to East Africa. "II-1 l" s'fivatng : _.a..‘-vU I o :64, free 1 I " =3 IOQN ‘ " we Uudv o. s ‘ lap-nan y ‘rg u.|s . ., . Afrzca m. 2122;: ex; c: Germ EaS‘ re;.":.lic, kam'u tee: scme {'"HEI ,. | .94" .. ”1“! Of 5 V!“ F a a “v... WAY: »‘ _‘ a:« , . " “Elnc d Pr” :J'Jr wi‘n. ‘ 45. < I migrated to GEA because "they wished . . . to go find a new, free land somewhere in Africa." He commented sceptically: I'Not too much value can be attached to this however, because these trekkers went to territories in East Africa which were already occupied by other powers and if they expected that the Germans would set off a piece of German East Africa for the establishment of their own republic, then this was nothing other than a fantastic dream.”17 Nevertheless in 1904-05, there may very well have been some Afrikaners who mistakenly believed that the frontier to the north was only nominally controlled by European powers and would still permit the birth of new Boer Republics.18 In one instance a letter writer to ES Volkstem united the political and economic issues. The correspondent argued that the poor had fought the war to the bitter end and had lost their herds of cattle and homes; naturally many of them would want to leave to better themselves. The rich were the first "hands-uppers" and now accused the poor of being unpatriotic for trekking. He claimed that the Poor would rather live in another country where they could 17C. J. Mans, "Vyftig Jaar Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk in Cos-Afrika," Hervormde Telo iese Studies Jaargang 20 (Krugersdorp: N. H. W. Pers), p. I73. 18A number of the interviewees declared this as one Of the major reasons for the trek. Interviews with Mr. and Mrs. J. Boshoff, June 6, 1969; P. L. Malan, August 9, 1961; Jozua Joubert, June 25, 1969. .n-I-..,.‘ I... 'flW. ' ‘ wqy : v- abj“. La- w . .ZE writer A n _ .533; me: W'FW1 l! s {dre‘aave ". ‘ 1 '7‘\"P‘FO \\ "bvlljlrb ‘P '9 av ‘...E'..EI g: x :a‘: 4 n v- ‘lU'. as are a: ,,.. baaé ‘P. ‘0 .‘d5: “a: PK V x! *4 L“ g I [—21 I I ~:;;;\. A ~ acquire land than stay in South Africa and serve the rich. The writer stated that he had toured the Transvaal and the Orange Free State and had determined that 30 percent of the populace were considering trekking.19 The same issue was brought up earlier by the legal representative of the Vorster group, which had asked for self—rule: I may tell you . . . that the Boer leaders as such are not in sympathy with the movement. This is because they are afraid their own balance of power would be weakened. They talk about weakening your nationality while you starve. Thus it would seem that the fractionalization which occurred within the Afrikaans community during and after the Anglo- Boer War over relations with the British was also a reason for the emigration of some to East Africa, and prior to 1908, it was the "bitter-enders" who found it necessary to move. Certainly this was the case with the first group to explore East Africa with the intention of settling there, the party led by Pieter C. Joubert. He and other members of the "commission, as it was called, "remained under the weapon to the end," and had agreed not to remain in South Africa if the Republic fe11.21 19Letter was signed "Africanus," 23 Volkstem, November 1, 1905, p. 5. 20African Standard, July 30, 1904, p. 2. For a discussion of the Bitterness engendered by the latter Phases of the war and the role of the "hands-uppers," see Muller, Five Hundred Years, pp. 311-16. 21See H. J. C. Pieterse, Volksaltare of in Veteraan van die Eerste Vr heidsoorlo (Kaapstad: NasIanale ers 53933:: Ing’, pp- ' - ..,-s, is ‘ "OITDD P: '9; p“ h. 5‘90. web nu I .r.. . ‘ o o ‘ v~ 2.. o o . ..a t a . I. &. xl. . e P» a.» Y. A; a» a... va Cu 5 at ‘ho “la an a DJ A _ . v «a .‘ 1h a J \— Aw New 14 Au v. aw MW 6. $1. a a.“ QC he \r. "a a. mu 0. e . Pa. 2.. It.“ 6 a c M Tu- .MH ”five. M... 7. a v». .Cw. {3. “do 0 n 11.2.!- ‘alun .q...1....lfi .J .V — r—r No discussion of the motives for the migration of the Afrikaners would be complete without reference to trekgees, or treklus. An exact translation of these words would be "trek-spirit" or "trek-lust," but an exact defi- nition is much more difficult. The South African historian P. J. van der Merwe has spent his lifetime studying the trekkers. Although he claimed that trekgees requires psychological study, he asserted that his years of research showed that trek ees is usually revealed in the form of a conscious But inexplicable drive to trek. This is usually accompanied by a feeling of restlessness, dissatis- faction with the surroundings in which an individual finds himself and a longing for change, new things and adventure. Further on he limited this broad definition somewhat. Trekgees is also revealed in the form of a desire to range over the unknown--he who has trek lust is not satisfied with mere change or variation; he wants something which is completely new. This type of person will trek greater distances and to unknown territory.22 Van der Merwe then gave an example of what he meant. He had interviewed an old man of 87 who had trekked all over southern Africa. When asked why he had done so, the old man answered, "This was the way I was; from youth on I had a love to travel round." When asked if he would do it again if he were young, he said that he would first go to school 22p. J. van der Merwe, Trek; Studies oor die I Mobiliteit van die PioniersbevoIkin aan die Kaap (Raepstad: NasionaIe Pers Beperk, I9155, pp. 235-56. 12.”. :22: e: .. . ‘1‘ O‘- as. a... . _. '5' edit. .‘ b'shr ,. a; pan- \ In R- “Jt is; he‘ny Jn.‘1' (y. 1.. "He's ,. ,‘ 'sa ' i " II 21"- v~l,‘.=. ‘. Pr“ C '..-.-_ r say ‘3 50 as in a out C 10 and then engage in even more travel than he had during his lifetime. There are still too many places which I have not seen. If the old Voortrekkers had my temperament, they would not have trekked to the Free State and the Transvaal only, they would have trekked straight across Africa. 3 Van der Merwe gave another example of this spirit, written in 1834 and taken from Moodie's South African Annals: The father of Field Cornet Kruger, then 84 years of age, was asked when the farmers would cease trekking, and live like civilised men? He replied: "When they reach the sea--let them trek, they must trek, as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did before them!" . . . On pointing out the totally different circumstances of the Israelites, in sanction-—guidance--and destination, and pressing the old man (who was listened to as a high authority) to say how far the Boers were to trek? he raised his hand, so as to indicate a great distance northwards, and said, in a loud decisive tone "Tot ander kant uit"--"till out on the other side." Certainly the biographies of some of the East Afri- can settlers verify the presence of trekgees within the community. The Hans du Toit family is one example. Hans and his wife Levina were born in the Pietersburg district of the Transvaal. She married a du Plessis at the age of 16 (1876), only to have her husband die a year later. In 1878 Hans and Levine married and shortly thereafter joined the infamous Dorsland Trek to Angola. Over half of these trekkers died of thirst and fever.25 Subsequently they lived in Damaraland for one year, Humpata for four, and 23I bid., p. 287. 24 Ibid.’ p. 299. 25See Muller, Five Hundred Years, pp. 399, 400. I It 5A "' 6?... vv dd. :lI-.A"fi“'~ rt: at... i. '1 a 6., one 9 one o'V ye . . span a ‘R out" 5:3.“ :ilitary s ‘1‘ a, . ' " fit A ». .J‘t : "mar's ~ --"— 11 back to Damaraland for two years. They then returned to Rustenburg, settled in Groot Spelonke in North Transvaal for two years, and then returned to Rustenburg. In 1893 they again travelled to Damaraland but Portugal's compulsory military service prompted the Du Toit's to move to South- west Africa a year later. After fourteen years trekgees again gripped them and they decided to migrate to BEA. After farming for ten years on the Uasin Gishu Plateau, they moved to the Belgian Congo. In this territory they lived in three northeastern localities: Songolo for one year, Bedo for ten years, and Mt. Rona for eight years. Levina died in 1936 at Mt. Rona, and the family returned to Kenya in 1937, where Hans died in 1938. Undoubtedly the Du Toit's migrations are symptomatic of the presence of old Kruger's trekgees.26 If the East African settlers were to be placed on a scale which measured the degree of mobility which they represented, the Du Toit's would be on the extreme end of the most mobile. Some were similar to the Van Rensburgs and the Cloetes, leaders of the two largest treks to BEA, who sold their prosperous farms in South Africa and attempted to reproduce their former farms on the Uasin Gishu Plateau. Most of the settlers were not so financially secure as these men, but their goals were much the same, 26Aucamp, ”Die Trek." “Du Toit Familie." m1" “ ."‘ .- 4-. 'eeb " ‘IP' ::=. noréb: "'6- l..\ e .' n .33. .3 2&5 its: was PECE 1e tre N“ ‘v A“ ‘_ my 3» net ‘ bloo~ CC" : +‘n 12 namely to establish themselves as successful farmers in East Africa.27 Those writing retrospectively usually gave geek geee a high position on their lists of reasons for the trek. M. P. Loubser, the first permanent Afrikaner clergy— man in East Africa, wrote a booklet in the early 19205 which was an apology for the trek.28 He contended that his people trekked north because of a God—given desire to do so: The inclination to the North is created in the volk by God, our refugees [or expatriates] can not hEIE-it that they are inspired with trekgees; it is in their blood. . . . That peculiar trek ees of the Afrikaner comes from Jehovah, and if it were not for that geee, there would also not be an Afrikaans history.29 In his estimation the trek to East Africa was merely an extension of the trek northward within South Africa. As late as the 19503, Afrikaner writers in East Africa were arguing that trekgees was the primary motive for the migration to East Africa.30 Though it would appear that this was a cause for the migration of some settlers, evidence does not support this as the only, or even the major cause for the trek. 27See ch. 11 for a discussion of these men and the treks they led. 28M. P. Loubser, "Onse Uitgewekene" (Kaapstad: De Nationale Pers Bpkt., no date), p. 9. 291bid., p. 10. 3oMans, "Vyftig Jaar," p. 178. Also see p. 12 of this chapter for further discussion of the Engelbrecht trekkers. “ l I. ‘8. v I 3.“. was 1 3535.9 9 s v: . a‘:lcd Kg tr»: ‘ N 12 namely to establish themselves as successful farmers in East Africa.27 Those writing retrospectively usually gave trek gees a high position on their lists of reasons for the trek. M. P. Loubser, the first permanent Afrikaner clergy- man in East Africa, wrote a booklet in the early 1920s which was an apology for the trek.28 He contended that his people trekked north because of a God—given desire to do so: The inclination to the North is created in the volk by God, our refugees [or expatriates] can not help it that they are inspired with trek ees; it is in their blood. . . . That peculiar trek ees of the Afrikaner comes from Jehovah, and if It were not for that gees, there would also not be an Afrikaans history.29 In his estimation the trek to East Africa was merely an extension of the trek northward within South Africa. As late as the 19503, Afrikaner writers in East Africa were arguing that trekgees was the primary motive for the migration to East Africa.30 Though it would appear that this was a cause for the migration of some settlers, evidence does not support this as the only, or even the major cause for the trek. 27See ch. II for a discussion of these men and the treks they led. 28M. P. Loubser, "Onse Uitgewekene" (Kaapstad: De Nationale Pers Bpkt., no date), p. 9. 291bid., p. 10. 3oMans, ”Vyftig Jaar," p. 178. Also see p. 12 of this chapter for further discussion of the Engelbrecht trekkers. Liners in tiagasca: " v ~"Fqur ‘ :.."“'d.'e Evin-1" a" "".U..\' 0v. It, A e.)‘ bet: - I l i (.I ; lave . 3 fegcrt ‘ .- r. 73; ',' ' We I L‘ HJ‘ F ‘ G \I‘. Set 9 '— .. tue .— -‘ 13 One of the first Afrikaners to consider East Africa as an area for settlement was Pieter Joubert. As the war turned against the Boers, Joubert began considering various areas for settlement. Because of Stanley's description of the Belgian Congo, he initially leaned in that direction.31 Others in his Ermelo district proposed Mozambique, Madagascar, GEA, and South America. Madagascar was eliminated when Karel Trichardt declared it "too Roman 32 Catholic” after a visit to the island. A few Afrikaners did settle in Mozambique but the settlement did not thrive.33 Joubert finally decided on GEA after receiving a report from a Willem Joubert who had sailed along the east coast and had stopped in the harbor of Dar es Salaam. There he had talked with two European cattle growers who spoke of much fertile open land in the interior. Willem carried this news to Pieter Joubert in January of 1903. Under Joubert's leadership a number of farmers from his district decided to send an expedition or "commission" to 31Pieterse, Volksaltare, p. 99. 321bid., p. 100. 330e Vereeni in , Deel IV, no. 5, September 8, 1904, p. 75; and—A. 5. Burger, "Naar Oost Afrika," Part I, Deel V, no. 32 (August 6, 1914), p. 744. The first reports that the settlement was in the Chachai district and the latter in the Port Amelia district. r—w, , . I-v ‘P an.,.e .., tyne unrkav'; on tacit-Iv A :seal... , a se- a A u . find re'e. our ‘1. v “on“, V J elk . QIW. . "Mair, ' -1 ':'- .. 34.53311 I. n .D "‘e "fit! 34.6? 9 . 1.... ‘ V . «.WEJ: P .5. £120“ f, his 14 explore that possibility.34 Aside from a futile attempt by the nephew of General Christiaan De Wet, also Christiaan De Wet, to cross into GEA from Northern Rhodesia to search for a homestead, this is the first reported attempt by Afrikaners to explore East Africa with the intent of settling there.35 After conferring with the German Consul in Pretoria and receiving a sympathetic letter of introduction from him, Joubert's commission of six left Machadodorp on January 14, 1903. They made their first stop at Dar es Salaam, where they were most cordially received by all of the government officials, including the governor. with Joubert as spokesman, the commission asked Governor von Gotzen to state the conditions upon which they would be able to acquire land and to grant permission for them to explore the interior for possible settlement sites. The latter request was quickly granted accompanied with a 34Pieter3e, Volksaltare, pp. 102-03. 35After he entered GEA, De Wet was never seen again. Cited in Lawrence G. Green, Great North Road, p. 170. C. J. Mans also refers to this assertion By Green in "Vyftig Jaar." Though he does not cite his source, M. P. K. Sorrenson contends that some Boers moved across Rhodesia into GEA and settled there until 1906 when they moved into the Protectorate. Sorrenson, Euro ean Settle- ment, p. 65. Other than this attempt by De Wet to foIIow the overland route, there is no conclusive evidence that any of the Afrikaners used this route prior to World War I. Only two of the Afrikaners interviewed, Mr. and Mrs. Boshoff, (June 2, 1969) seemed aware of the possibility that some of their community came to East Africa overland and they were very uncertain about this matter. This author can only conclude that all came by sea. 'r"". ‘a*'a ....r of Ibavv-osl um»? ‘M'p? v ~ u b ‘th‘b. a . ‘1... ".;DH 1“ an...»\‘ rupee per 5L:“; “I“ ‘1... receive» Elét 5.4., aCCEsS . "Kitten s: “"ei'fc. that a: this 1:; V 15 letter of introduction for officials in the interior directing them to cooperate with the commission. The former request was also granted and the conditions were indeed liberal. The total cost of the land would be one rupee per hectare.36 Each of the five adult members of the commission (the sixth was the young son of one of the adults) would receive 10,000 hectares of land, and succeeding settlers would receive from 3,000 to 5,000 hectares. Furthermore, each purchaser could pay the cost of the land over a twenty-five year period through a lease arrangement in which the rental cost would apply to the principle.37 Rather than trekking directly inland from Dar es Salaam, the commission was advised to travel by ship to 36 shillings. One hectare = 2.471 acres and one rupee = 15 37Pieterse, Volksaltare, pp. 104-09. Pieterse received his information from Johannes Joubert, the son of Piet Joubert and a member of the commission. Pieterse had access to a copy of the letter from the German Governor written in Dutch stating the conditions given above. This copy stated that the members of the expedition were to receive a combined total of 10,000 hectares rather than that amount for each. Pieterse convincingly reasons that this must have been the result of an error in the trans- lation from the German because of another statement in the letter which gave the commission the right to reserve two 50,000 hectare areas, one of which could be claimed by the group within two years if they settled on the land. Fur- thermore, succeeding settlers were promised 3,000 to 5,000 hectares per settler which would be larger than the share of each member of the commission if the lower figure were accepted. Van‘s-:sa ntw‘ ‘ ' » ‘rfiwna ‘.:~ 1.~a..u .“- fiK--q ‘ Ar VJ!~.Q‘ ‘V.. r- I “. "'1 v 0- .. ve‘e‘ '50 v ‘ 5' A J. ”TOE ‘y V bu. ’UI‘E. . .gfiflkasg 16 Mombasa, by Uganda Railway to Lake Victoria, and over land back to Tanga or Dar es Salaam.38 As they traveled inland by rail, they were very favorably impressed by the land around Nairobi and Nakuru. At Nakuru three members of the commission climbed the slopes of the Menengai Crater in order to get a better view of the land around. Later one of the three told H. J. C. Pieterse: "It was so beautiful and fertile that all of us had a strong desire to remain in Nakuru and occupy farms." Unfortunately, it was British territory and for self-imposed reasons unavailable for these migrant Boers.39 It is highly probable that this impression of BEA was conveyed to a number of Afrikaners upon the return of the commission to South Africa and may have encouraged others to trek there a few years later. The commission re-entered GEA via a Lake Victoria steamer and began their journey back to the coast. They had not penetrated the interior far before malaria struck the group, killing one. Shortly thereafter the commission returned to Mombasa by the same route they had gone inland and boarded a ship for South Africa. All were discouraged by the dread fever and were sceptical of the feasibility of settling in GEA. Others were not intimidated by the experiences of this commission. Under the leadership of Piet von Landsberg, seven families, including forty-one individuals, 38 39 Ibids’ pa 108a Ibide' pp. 112-13. b no 5r. 9. O... .o 5 ' ' t .' well" 7 .uto'. sate ‘P n--- ‘ wEC’JaDe Ca P:'~ 1 a F: Adlldd C.,“| 4 4 "i5"- p'h ( ' e .--l is: \ "ml in 'OuD' ._ F.-”"‘ V n \ ‘vaul.a- ' In“ Ann‘- "" VJ“ C :flAp-,. A I; O at va-.~‘“‘ A ~ ‘ ._‘ .51.,flara Mr" H ‘ u | o... d O. 'n spay “:«o-5 a: t._~ \ 5" . F- ‘vui. ‘ v 17 Mt out to settle in GEA in 1904 without reconnoitering the atea before-hand. According to one member of the group, their friends and neighbors refused to bid them farewell because of their supposed foolishness. The party landed in Tanga only to find that they would be required to confer With the German governor in Dar es Salaam before they could travel inland and take up land. The governor attempted to discourage them from settling in the remote area of Arusha but acquiesced in face of their determination.40 He accompanied them to Mombo, the terminal point of the Usarnbara Railway at that time, and assisted them in the hiring of labor and the acquisition of oxen for their five "390118 and agreed to permit them to mark off 1,000 hectares per male adult. After unsuccessfully trying again to dissnade them from their dangerous trek, the governor ordered a government physician to accompany them and bade them farewell. Despite its short distance, the journey from Mombo to Ar"Ashe lasted three months, largely because the oxen were untrained, and to save the time needed to train them, the settlers tried to draw the wagons with kaffers. After the latter ran off, it became necessary to take the time to train the oxen, a skill for which the Afrikaners became no ted throughout East Africa. The difficult trek and fibfia 40No reason was found for their choice of this anvb~nu . rm“ owl-sesAJJ-a: an”; A , ECG-.34 “I §IC§F GSI :53: out 1 21512655 i ‘i .I in». - :U H '15.. t“ ‘C"-~~| «1.54.5 S ; A ~515ervat 7A0... ~ y‘V: 1‘s; 3 ice “‘ arm; '6'. Isle rao.‘ h 18 continuous disease had discouraged many by the time they 1reached Moshi but the hardier individuals prevailed and the group pushed on to the Arusha area. Here they proceeded to mdilrk out their 1,000 hectares apiece and began with the 41 business of eking out a living on the frontier. No explanation can be given for the discrepancy between the generous offer of land given to Joubert and his "commission" the preceeding year and the considerably more The Censervative offer given the von Landsberg trekkers. Same year the smaller figure was also offered the Vorster Specifically, the German Government group in South Africa. Promised Vorster 50 hectares apiece of arable land to those 8ettlers who would make required improvements on the land Another (European-styled house and service-buildings) . 1'000 hectares of pasture land per settler was offered at an annual cost of 30 rupees with the option of purchase at 42 It is possible that the rate of one rupee per hectare. \-——_ duri 41This account was given to D3. Jac. Conradie 192739 his period of service as a clergyman in GEA from 30h to 1929 by a member of this group of settlers, Petrus gecmnes Van Dyk. Upon request D3. Conradie sent this Nedourlt to D3. F. G. M. Du Toit, the Archivist of the nerduitse Gereformeerde Kerk of the Transvaal. The reusQript is stored in the archives of this church in Geséria. Conradie entitled the article "Boustowwe I. V. Qdenis van die Afrikaners van Oos-Afrika" and dated it A 1"”11 4, 1967. exit; ”African Standard, August 13, 1904, p. 5. men 1' some overEures were also made to the German Govern- k‘nt requesting exemption from military service for Afri- % Q1? settlers. This was also granted. District govern— support was promised to the settlers in their search EQ t; . . labor. Finally, on the mistaken presumption that the M. Appar- ‘ IK ' I' .Ii -II'I‘i‘t'FI F‘ ‘mqli I q». 1 this mere : Serra“. 60': agratlon cf settli: is a repo: 5:31 Kidd PIEpared Ether f3] leave SOL him-Moi 19 this more conservative offer marked the beginning of the German Government's reluctance to encourage European Illigration into East Africa.‘13 There are a number of other reports of groups of Afrikaners leaving South Africa in 1904 with the intention of settling in GEA. Some must be viewed sceptically. One is a report that F. Bezuidenhout led a trek of 30 families from Middelburg and Waterburg and that 300 families were Prepared to migrate from the Transvaal and an unknown 44 Two small groups did number from the Orange Free State. Both groups used the Tanga- leave South Africa in 1904. Another party under the leader- Mombo-Moshi-Arusha route. ship of Marthinus Engelbrecht left the Enkeldorn district 0f Rhodesia in August of 1904, traveled overland to Beira, boarded a ship for Tanga, and moved directly inland from there- Their intention was to settle in the Belgian Congo. Near Kondoa-Irangi they were stopped by the rough terrain of the Mburu Mountains and were diverted northwards to the x— tlers would arrive overland, passage and freight (one Set 01: a single man and one and one-half tons for a 2:; 113) were promised from Fort Johnston to Mwaya. b See n. 63 for discussion of this change of policy )7 the Germans. ' boat 44African Standard, July 30, 1904, p. 2. No other It; irences were oun to a Bezuidenhout trek of any size. 3 highly unlikely that there was one. 45Mans, “Vyftig Jaar," p. 177. .‘arusna are 'N' set: A “the “"3‘1' r “:edbe .. tether r sq; 4-)- “Used “.9: .1 20 Arusha area. They arrived at the center of the new Afri- lKaner settlement, Kampfontein, towards the end of 1905.46 The greatest amount of interest in GEA occurred in 1905. One report by a clergyman not participating in the Migration stated that 130 families had left South Africa and would join the 75 families already present in East This figure must have been exaggerated but Africa.“7 another report based on the evidence of one of the trekkers nOted that there were fifty households in his group. The reconnaissance missions from South Africa also continued during this year. Extensive reports were pub- lished by two of these expeditions. March under the leadership of S. P. E. Trichard and in— One group left in eluded at least ten prospective settlers.49 Most of the 46Ibid., p. 180; African Standard, October 1, 1904, p. 9? "Vergenoeg Gemeente FeesBrOJure, p. 18. Subse- Silently this group migrated to the Nairobi area of BEA ere they remained for three years, moved on to the M010 strict and eventually settled on the Uasin Gishu Plateau. di Vex: . 47 . P. Burger, "De Trek naar D. O. Afrika," D_e_ W, Deel IV, no. 25, June 15, 1905, p. 5. There is 6133 . stantiating evidence for this large number. Burger Tr ° «Indicated that twenty families had returned to the ans‘faal. 48Conradie, "Boustowwe." For other accounts see ak van die Gereformeerde Kerk, 1938, pp. 196-202; D_e W Wfiomm't‘ 9Reports in De Volkstem listed the names of ten ; and April 1, 1905, p. 6. min. March 22, 1955, p. firri Otel Cecil of Mombasa listed the names of fifteen 3% Vale from the Transvaal in the African Standard of e 3, 1905, p. 7. Seven of the names In t e A rican Three names in Wtem 81: amidard were in Re Volkstem. . 5 £32915 0. ""9:st “‘1. AI . .'.6 d 1'. {I‘ll-be .1- () 't‘! 'L’ (D (j. — .— — — — ‘.h ‘vq r . ‘ . :1... u‘ y nus Tc: ‘ ‘\-QV “srfi 21 nIembers of the expedition came from the Middelburg, Krugersdorp and Ermelo districts. Their first report was Printed in Re Volkstem in June and warned those who had already left for Delagoa Bay and GEA that they would have difficulty finding oxen after their arrival in East Africa. FUrthermore they warned that "it is not at all certain if 50 Indeed, all is so rose—colored as some have pictured it." the succeeding reports urged caution and recommended: that men should precede their families and acquire 1- oxen and train them before their families arrived; 2 - that trekkers should expect to depend on hunting for support rather than agriculture or pastoralism; 3- that each settler should have at least 5200; 4 - that prospective settlers should confer with a 51 member of the committee before going to GEA. On their return to South Africa, the expedition stopped at Dar es Salaam and spoke with members of the German administration. They were particularly concerned about the use of Dutch in their schools. x— Those eight Afrikaners we re;? nOt in the African Standard. ezméstered in the HoteI CeCi at the same time as the 1 dition may have been part of the expedition increasing ‘::3 ‘3 To their ize to eighteen. 50De Volkstem, June 21, 1905, p. 4. The group Wh "Qieh had 13ft was reported to have 35 families and 40 It is possible that this was the same group on r a eta: ° . red to in the above paragraph. 9‘ s 512112.. July 19. 1905. p. 3; August 23, 1905, I' hit-A. ‘ .r ,_ a. W A it: ‘4 352183522 O ‘ja r... "h fl ‘- 58 L2 tic reside : ports. claimed t the tsets ‘ l "“1115 ”Is us. 22 diSpleasure, the German officials insisted that German be Used if the schools were to be government supported. Another expedition of eight Afrikaners (including tWo residents of Natal) published even more pessimistic reports. Their exact itinerary was not given but they They found claimed to have traveled through much of GEA. the land low and uninhabitable and infested with fever and Only the slopes of Kilimanjaro and the the tsetse fly. One member fOot:.h;i.lls of Meru were habitable by whites. gave this description of those Afrikaners already settled in GEA: Poverty is not the correct word for the misery under Which they labour. The possessions of Hans Botha and three other Boers near him are as follows: two cows and calves, two donkeys and one old horse. Snijman has one calf; Van Emmenis has nothing except his wife and children; Van Dijk, or Van Wijk, has one wagon with We did not visit the other Boers per- fourteen oxen. Sonally but the Germans told us that their condition was not better. With no exception they live in tents Or small, miserable grass-houses. He asstarted that the grass was virtually impenetrable and discouraged planting. The Afrikaners seemed spiritless, 53 and “any of the children were naked. 2Ibid., October 11, 1905, p. 8; and October 18, 1905' p 4 1905 salbid-v J‘nY 5. 1905: P- 4; and September 13, e quote was taken from the latter report. It i. p. 7. 3 impossible to determine exactly how many were sent out In addition to those recon— on 9§irficonnaissance missions. it; 8once missions accounted for here, there was one article ”(1% Volkstem by an A. C. M. du Plooy who had toured GEA age I‘eported that agriculture was good, but that disease th e('1 to limit cattle-growing; September 3, 1904, p. 5. w . . . §h e may have been a number of other such misSions which unreported and will remain unknown. thezse Ive reperts '.' f. I . . . u€..EIai.. SGttlerS 1“ A “cenbes e“. a+ t; ‘ “r?. I ‘v ‘c 23 Letters sent back to South Africa by the settlers themselves presented a mixed picture. Initially the The first such letter to be pub- 1reports were favorable. lished was sent by Jan Viljoen to his brother in mid-1904. Generally he approved of the Germans' policy towards the Settlers though he objected to the high cost of the game licenses. A few months later, A. S. De Beer favorably described the remoteness of the area and the abundance of Wildlife. He concluded: "I shall certainly never return to the Transvaal. We have a great many small cattle and 55 A month later another letter from a Plenty of milk." l'ecerit arrival stated that his group had had difficulty finding the right area to settle in but had found the Meru area to be very good. The government had offered them libell’:al terms for the purchase of land and had surveyed the area at no expense to the settlers. The ground was fertile find water plentiful. Labor was cheap, ls.4d to ls.6d. per month: and they were not dangerous. . One good lash with a sjambok on the behind is enough to put 1000 on the and the government's policy is to handle the kaffers In conclusion he gave his friend this advice: run. fimly." BEst friend, we have decided to stay here and we can- not, thank the Lord enough for delivering us out of \_—_ 54Game licenses were 550. 552% Volkstem, January 14, 1905, p. 5. I“ our ; But t w:i* ‘éb newsgape: asistan' editors, 1’. 'Pfle Fu- ‘ WU“ u. 3?ny ftp; / 24 our poverty, nevertheless we ask no one to come here. But those people who are desirous of coming must not wait too long. The editor of 23 Volkstem, in which this was published, exPressed scepticism of this glowing report. In May the newspaper reported that some Boers needed government aSSistance in GEA. Living on game is one matter, said the editxars, but what would happen when the game was gone?57 A month later .D_e Volkstem cribbed an article from the Sunday Times reporting disagreement among German officials Concerning Boer migration to East Africa. The governor and the Kapitein of the Moshi district would not set down definite terms for the acquisition of the land. The editors Connented: "Everyone can see from this that this is no land flowing with milk and honey."58 H. De Beer to 292 (uncle) C. J. Kruger dated Another letter from B. M- November 18, 1905, spelled out the grief which some of the His brother was ill and e‘rlier settlers had experienced. He his mother, little brother, and grandfather had died. lamented: We heard a great deal about the land but it is not true and I am bitterly sorry that we are here, but it is c‘<>d's will. . . . There is no gain for us here, and the cattle whereof we heard so much, those that are so in— efittaensive, are also not so, and all the goodness of the land is also not there. Everything which people eat x“hat be bought and all the game which we shoot must 561bid., February 1, 1905, p. 5. 57 Ibid., May 10, 1905, p. s. 581bid., June 1, 1905, p. 4. were inu- ‘t-fl .. "F‘I' ~_ 9 a. a tn...) ‘. ::e 0“;, q... ..at;cr.a‘. 1 ‘i Lafion s f‘ 25 We also be bought [by license fees, presumably]. . . . want to go back home and help us as you see fit. 00111, if it were possible for us to go by land, then Fwould already have left. We would tell all our friends who want to trek that I advise them to stay where they are. In 1905 the first predikant visited East Africa-— A. P. Burger.60 His reports indicated that the Germans w(are indeed becoming dissatisfied with their decision to encrourage Boer migration to their territory. Burger asked One official for land for a church building and was promised Some only on condition that the church be open to all nationalities. He accepted this condition but the stipu- lation that all government-supported schools must use German was unacceptable. In a conversation with the governor, Burger was asked to search for an instructor in The governor South Africa who knew both Dutch and German. insiSted, however, that there was to be no ecclesiastical Though some of interference in the government schools. \— 591bid., November 18, 1905, p. 4. Afri 60There are three Dutch Reformed Churches in South ca 0 the Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk, the Nederduitsch 1'l‘mde Kerk, and the Gereformeerde Kerk (hereafter NGK, 3""0 szfié al'ld GK respectively). The first, whom Burger repre- ed. is by far the largest, counting about 42 percent of The other two had ites of South Africa in the 19603. For a brief histori- e‘percent and 3 percent respectively. ca“ “ketch of the development of these churches, see Lesley ( d, The Churches and Race Relations in South Africa 0Q J __ 193%) nefirWhWrm m 3f Race REY-{Eight I Q | t D§§1 61"‘Mijne Reis naar D. O. Afrika," D_e Vereeniging, ) V, DO. 8’ OCtOber 19, 1905' Pp. 3.4. v (aners, h "31:." 3‘ q 4‘50 cu... ,. h flr‘FA‘ ' o UVAA‘- the 1 “.Q “tug. *“"ed ‘ were la“: n 26 the German officials were sympathetic towards the Afri- kaners, he said that "there is much to complain about the officials in Arusha."62 A final report described the physi- cal condition of the settlers. Despite the cheapness of the land (one rupee per hectare) only twenty-five of one hundred families had found suitable land. The remainder were landless and homeless. Consequently, during 1906 62A. P. Burger, "Onze Uitgewekenen in cost-Afrika," Kerkbode, Deel XXII, no. 52, December 28, 1905, pp. 63"Verslag," D_e Vereeni in , Dee‘l V, no. 17, February 22, 1906, pp. 7-5. The dissatisfaction of the Afrikaners with German officialdom had basis in fact. The Gennan imperial historian W. 0. Henderson referred to the Year 1906 as a turning point in the history of GEA. He attributed this to the advent of Dr. Bernhard Dernburg as the first Colonial Minister after the election of January, 1907 in Germany. Furthermore, the anti-settler policies of the Colonial Minister were actively supported and carried °“t by the Governor in GEA from 1906 to 1912, Baron Albrecht v°n Rechenberg. Of him Henderson commented: "He strongly OPPOBed the indiscriminate use of the whip and insisted that corporal punishment should be inflicted only by due process of . Rechenberg faced opposition from planters, who izgarded his native policy as a diabolical attempt to put them Out of business. . . . The issue between Rechenberg and o e 8ettlers was whether the territory should develop as a Rcomercial' or a 'plantation‘ colony. Dernberg and - ec enberg believed that the territory should develop as a a1 rcial' colony. They believed that the natives--and “08° the old-established German trading and shipping firms-- tiulj‘ benefit more from a 'commercial' than from a 'planta- was“ economy. Their objection to a 'plantation' colony diattl-‘at European estates would attract native workers to exi rlcts far from their homes and that consequently the easting tribal organization would be disrupted. They (16 red that a black proletariat would develop as a new "GErQSBed social class on the plantations." Henderson, East Africa, 1884-1918," pp. 147-48. Though 1906 may have been the year in which the new Sgt?“ colonial policy was officially announced, earlier Offil?r dissatisfaction indicates that lower echelon elal attitudes may have been changing before the De 53'4— s. I ‘ n e.;r..ee.. 1 * Ritzmer "I" t"rwl wivrat...‘ ' tsre, the :f .933 9; 2.79 f 113 inless t‘r, :;~"IVI a‘v ‘uouoa. L ne‘.'~' b‘ 'U.": D; a ‘3'». .‘ New 0? In. “. '-~- more fine sett] ‘w-A ‘ n M ‘ {deity b 'Cghm .' ..."§Ai‘ '52:: CC; :23. of nontrib.‘ ”U‘C", 27 ten families returned to South Africa and thirty-three leaving fifty-two families in GEA with eighteen unattached adults.“ moved to BEA, 1906-07 period. Burger's reports verify the fact that the Afrikaners' dissatisfaction predated 1906, though the large migration from that territory occurred that year. Further- more, the liberal land grants offered the Joubert Commission of 1903 were never again offered the Afrikaners, not even the following year, 1904, when the first settlers arrived. Unless this was due to the Afrikanerphobia of particular administration officials, it would seem that the change of policy began at least two years prior to Rechenberg's advent on the scene. This deserves further investigation with more attention being given to the relationships between the settlers and their local administrators. A more complete study of this transition in colonial policy by Richard V. Pierard identified three areas of (1) financial autonomy on reform by the Dernburg ministry: the part of each colony; (2) rapid railway construction in each colony to further development; and (3) humane treat- ment of indigenous populations in order to permit them to contribute more effectively to the economic life of each The last policy, which precipitated a non-flogging received quick and bitter reaction from the German planters. Undoubtedly, the Afrikaners' position was similar to that of their fellow settlers. Richard V. Pierard, "The Dernburg Reform Policy and German East Africa, Tanzania Notes .an_d Records, no. 67 (June, 1967), pp. 31-38. colony . ordinance , 6“‘J. M. Louw, "Naar Duitsch en Britsch Oost Afrika," Deel VIII, no. 9, October 29, Part IV, De Vereeni in , 1908: pp._l'3'7-§§. ¥5ese figures must be taken as approxi- mations. The figure for those who migrated to BEA is Verified by a letter sent from Nairobi by the Reverend N. H. Thel'lunissen in 1906. In it he stated that there were th-“-1|'-‘ty-five families in BEA. Since only the Arnoldi fami 1y, the von Breda brothers and John De Waal had mi- grated directly to BEA before 1906, the figure of thirty- three for those who migrated from the German territory is Very nearly accurate. as Vereenigingl Deel VI, no. 12, Decelnber 13, 1906, p. 7. In one report after his 1905 visit to GEA, A. P. "33:91.23;- stated that there were 300 Afrikaners in GEA. eat-{8139” EgVereeni in , February 22, 1906, p . 7-8. An t ier report stated that there were 360 “souls" in GEA. 3 not clear who was included in either of these two In both cases he used the term zielen meaning figures. 18 or baptized members of the church. Though Burger had were dis: I ‘L'.Il v.1" Ia “.1 ether at: g:'gfl“g"y J “eevVee : 9 e .’ ‘2 $187.. I '5 R “f: Jeraflua sendzng ‘35 ever. given ex m‘q ‘ ““5: ti. I1 s -:a“e an 1: A.“ I J‘.e fa. f Havc: Q 28 The above figures indicate that most of those who were dissatisfied with the Germans preferred to migrate to BEA rather than return to South Africa or migrate to any Before 1906 a number of Afrikaners migrated other area. In September of 1904, a meeting was held directly to BEA. in Lydenburg to consider the possibility of settling in Considerable sentiment was shown in favor of The proposal "Oeganda." sending a reconnaissance mission to the area. was eventually rejected after a number of speeches were 65 given exhorting the group to remain in the vaderland. Thus, the anti-British sentiment was not strong enough to prevent some Afrikaners from discussing the possibility of settling in BEA, though it did prevent actual settlement in 1904. The settlers in GEA had become well acquainted with BEA because of the necessity, or rather preferability, of passing through that territory in their travels to and from In mid-1905, eight families of one of the the coast. larger treks went on to Mombasa rather than disembarking at ‘Wafie: an attempt to unite the members of the three churches 1“ One congregation affiliated with his church, the NGK, four families had refused. They were Abraham Joubert, Martiens Prinsloo, and Danie Erasmus of the GK, and Jan De .Beer of the NHK. These families might not have been counted 3‘“ the lower figure. Aucamp, "Die Trek,” "Die Abraham Mgub?rt Trek." Also he counted thirty Afrikaners in the De:hl area in another report. "Verslag," D_e_ Vereeniging, eel V, no. 6, February 8, 1906, pp. 6-7. These may have of 1:; excluded in the lower figure. Therefore the figure (3 is reasonable for the size of the community before ‘6 t he 1906 flight from GEA. 65_I_)__e__Volkstem,iSeptember 14, 1904, p. 3. IF Trga. S faveta-YL Arusha r: traspsr: rather t‘: mute s"- AUJ I'll 'I d y». ‘ l i";; . "4-;‘3 \ 4v,‘ 5 "st: LL,- 29 Tanga. Subsequent immigrants followed the Mombasa-Voi- Taveta-Moshi-Arusha route rather than the Tanga-Mombo-Moshi- Arusha route. Before this particular migration Afrikaner transport riders were already using the Mombasa-Voi route rather than the Tanga route.66 Not only was the former route shorter, but it was also cheaper.67 Traveling through BEA fostered familiarity with that territory and its administration. These contacts broke down some of the antipathies which the Afrikaners harbored for the British. Furthermore, movement by the Afrikaners across the border caused friction between the settlers and the German administration. Piet Van Dyk had been ”riding transport" into BEA in 1904 or early 1905 and had been caught on one occasion by the German officials for rust paying tariff on the goods he was transporting across true border. The tariff and the fine cost him all of his prtafits for that trip. His reaction was to migrate: 66Conradie, "Boustowwe." 67In 1905 the Tanga Railway was completed to Mombo, 1665 Iniles from Moshi, whereas Voi, the nearest Uganda Rail- wa¥ terminal, is 79 miles from Moshi. See Heinrich Brode, BI‘J-tish and German East Africa (New York: Longmans, ”1113931 & 53:, 1911), pp. 56-30. When Brode traveled through f ~13 area, the railway had been completed to Same, 68 miles Urom Moshi. The settlers of this area continued to use the Tganda Railway because of much cheaper rates. In 1911 the 1129a Railway reached Moshi. See C. W. Leverett, "An Out- Tane of the History of Railways in Tanganyika 1890-1956," IEFE§%}§EEX$EE.N°tes and Records, 48 and 49 (June and September, (A1?1:' 0 pp. 158-09; and John R. Day, Railwa s of Northern ‘-———£E£E§§ (London: Arthur Barker Limite , ), pp. 11-15. Aft j vie e “In t of 5' are ' at“. 33K \’ " 5“" He. eKa: a buerE 4‘ ’1‘ 1 “I I on I (a . \l' (I! h '._ (7v— .. u} ’1 (7 I! I 30 After the heavy fine which I had to pay and which I viewed as extreme injustice, I said to Brother Koos; "In this land I will stay no longer. Under this sort of laws I will not buckle!" My intention was then already to go to British East Africa to look things over and to try to get hold of some money.68 Van Dyk moved in 1906 and was accompanied by five other Afrikaner settlers.69 Others among the thirty-three families which moved to BEA include Abraham Joubert and Martinus Engelbrecht and his group. By mid-1906 the attention of Afrikaners in South Africa who were thinking about trekking changed from GEA to BEA. Though the parents of Sangiro or A. A. Pienaar ndgrated to GEA in 1907,?0 there is no indication that any others migrated there before the end of World War I. In fact, the population of the community remained so stable that inter-marriages among families became a necessity and aa problem for the next twenty years. This practice termi- nated only when younger members of the community went 68Conradie, "Boustowwe." 69One of the five was P. L. (Flip) Malan. He indi- cated in an interview (August 9, 1969) that he moved because of dissatisfaction with the Germans' policy towards OStrich farming. No other reference was found that ostrich falfiflting was indeed practiced by the Afrikaners in GEA. ‘311 (interviewed, Malan was ninety-five years old and partially incapacitated. Information received from him may therefore have been inaccurate. .M 7OSee H. J. C. Pieterse, Baanbrekers in die I§;§%2353i£23 (Kaapstad: Nasionale Pers BePerEr T5455! pp. F. .e u .e u e . um - .Cl I“ file .h b s .2 ”’4 “v“ 3. V a I n A v n.“ S v .9.» u NU. 6L a e “A. r . V. . a» mi a: a» 19.5 qflu AH» {1‘ . e .e . .1» e n1 3 . q . v . v e .n M e \I. red A 5. Au a». .o. e h V a .a u b - Di ‘ 0 NJ. .7. lhu mm 3.“ alled‘ :urgev R V 31 "South" for their schooling, there to meet non-relatives and enter conjugal ties with them.‘71 Six or seven families who were dissatisfied with the Moshi-Arusha area traveled farther inland rather than return home or settle in BEA. Ds. M. P. Loubser visited this splinter group in 1910. All had originally settled in the Mwanza area but when Loubser visited them only four poverty-striken families remained. The other families had left Mwanza and had traveled south to try their fortunes at gold-mining at Sekenke. They too had been unsuccessful and were then trying to raise money for their return to South Africa.72 Life within Meru (as the main settlement was called) deteriorated after 1906. During his 1905 visit, :Burger attempted to set up one church in East Africa, tusping to avoid the ecclesiastical divisions characteristic of? South Africa. His attempt failed. Shortly after he left, the community again divided and later the NHK was 73 formed. Not only did unification prove elusive but the k 71Conradie, ”Boustowwe." 72M. P. Loubser, "Duitsch Oost Afrika; Rapport aan den Ring van Lijdenburg," part I, D_e_ Kerkbode, Deel I, no. 15' October 13, 1910, pp. 239-40. No subsequent references were found to these settlers. 73Conradie, "Boustowwe." See Kfihn's letter to the fgigor of De Hervormer, 2de Jaargang, no. 20, December 15, <3r11:- 0 pp. 7:5. It would seem that the GK was not formed Stalng this early period and that most of its members Yeti with the NGK. 32 strict moral code taught by the Dutch Reformed Churches was also being broken. In 1910 Loubser complained that the men, when out transport riding or hunting, usually forgot about keeping the Sabbath holy. There had been reported three cases of sexual promiscuity, two involving married men and kaffermeiden, and one involving an unmarried girl. Three girls had married outside of the community, one to a German, another to a Syrian (probably a Greek rather than a Syrian), and the third to a Jew.74 Loubser attributed this promiscuity to the debilitating effect which the German and the few Greek settlers had on the Afrikaners. Economically, the community remained at the marginal level. One report declared that where there was water the farms were beautiful but that good land and water were clifficult to find in combination, and that malaria was a ccnatinual problem.75 The completion of the Usambara Rail- way to Moshi in 1911 did not substantially improve their 76 economic position. Before the outbreak of World War I K’ 74Loubser, "Duitsch Oost Afrika," part II, De W. Deel I, no. 16, October 20, 1910, pp, 257533. IPE> 75LouW, "Naar Duitsch en Britsch Cost-Afrika," ‘ 137-38. 76See n. 67. it {- . I“ ‘ " "‘ -* "fn’ifl awn-ac. those A5 that te: {63.8.1 I} ‘3 pressing in 1913: tins it the 51:51 the sets. Which p P‘thher— ‘A '1 1) l f (11 (D (D ‘ 1" H’ L) ,2- . . rr 1 H u: I , , l 1“ c]- u: :11 “-< v f I). 1).! av :I L): r-fi I); (I) H 0‘ .1.“ . r '1. ‘th \- fiJ' I : r.:+ 5 33 those Afrikaners who visited BEA usually decided to stay in that territory rather than return to GEA.77 One of the major difficulties in GEA after 1906 remained the unsympathetic German administration. Ex- pressing the opinion of most of the settlers, Loubser said in 1910: "The Germans are feeble-minded colonists; at times it looks as if the officials are throwing the land to the sharks."78 Earlier the Reverend Louw had enumerated the settlers' complaints. He noted the stringent land laws which prevented many Afrikaners from becoming land owners.79 Furthermore, land-owners were not permitted to purchase big game licenses. This regulation particularly grated the Afrikaners. Loubser's primary complaint, however, was the government's insistence that the school which it had built at Kampfontein near Arusha use German exclusively. When 77A. 0. Burger, "Naar Oost Afrika," 22 Kerkbode, Deel V, no. 32, August 6, 1914, pp. 744-45. 78Loubser, "Duitsch Oost Afrika," part III, p. 278. 79Louw, "Naar Duitsch en Britsch Cost-Afrika," PEN. 137-38. According to Heinrich Brode, thirty-seven Boers owned 21,140 hectares while two Germans owned 2,250 hectares, two Englishmen owned 2,000 hectares, and one Greek owned 390 hectares in the Kilimanjaro-Meru areas. BI‘DC3GB, British and German East Africa, p. 35. The adminis- Frat ion subsequ'e-rfifly refused to approve the sale of land 1“ 'tJIis area to any other person than a German, an under- standable reaction to this heavy dominance of land ownership aidAfrikaners. Nonetheless, Loubser decried this regulation Wh . declared it to be extremely onerous for the Afrikaners, :L<=r1 it.undoubted1y was. Loubser, "Duitsch Oost Afrika," part III, p. 278. , I In" .1qu ser ‘ 34 Loubser began teaching Sunday School in 1910, the children had difficulty learning Bible verses in Dutch and Loubser was asked by the parents to permit the children to learn them in German. To Loubser this was tantamount to the come plete loss of identity by the Afrikaners and signalled their eventual amalgamation into German society. His complaints to the local administrator, arguing that the Germans were permitted their own school and language in America, France, and South Africa, proved fruitless. Loubser concluded that Dutch could be preserved as the language only through the 80 Loubser conceded that establishment of private schools. the Afrikaners had not been innocent in their deteriorating relationship with the government. The strict game laws and the 550 big game hunting license were frequently disre- garded by the Afrikaners. "Some of our people are not free of transgression since some of them shoot big game without licenses, while others cross into British territory to shoot game, which has not placed them in a favorable 81 He further position with the British government." admitted: "Some of our people have fled German East Africa to escape the export fee on their cattle, a deed which has 80Loubser, "Duitsch Dost Afrika," part II, pp. 257- 53- Also see C. S. de Wet, "Historiese Oorsig van die Afrikaanse 0nderwys in Tanganyika sedert 1905," part II, .O_<3§ Afrika, Deel I, no. 3, May, 1947, pp. 8-10. Mrs. De 54631: :recalled the building of the Ngarenanyuki school. 81Loubser, "Duitsch Oost Afrika," part II, p. 257. e’: M 1'" DU 5" .4 5- I ‘EC‘LZa y o g'. A O 1 4"?‘ F dud. Nu ..~¢ an m... M l .936. ‘ 1‘01; a“ wane A i a ‘H Q0 ybe S “9:; ““e "e .833; I I” 35 made those who remained in German East Africa smell badly to the Germans and it has given those who fled a smudged reputation in the British territory on their arrival."82 It is not clear what those who migrated to BEA during 1906 and the following years expected to find. In South Africa the British administration may not have been benevolent in their eyes, but in 1906 it appeared more benign than that of the Germans. At any rate, the ideologi- cal qualms which members of the Piet Joubert Commission expressed about living in British territory in 1903 had been dissipated in the minds of many Afrikaners in GEA by 1906. Some may have thought British land policies more generous than they actually were. A letter from one of these settlers erroneously stated that there were specially favorable conditions which applied to the Boers only.83 Whatever their motives may have been for migrating, subse- quent reports do not indicate that their state was improved in BEA. In 1908 a clergyman noted that there were 25 fandlies of these trekkers who resided in the Nairobi and Athi River areas and all were doing poorly. The others had 821bid., part I, p. 241. 8322,V01k3tem: August 25, 1906, p. 7. Also see sorrenson, European Settlement, particularly pp. 57-58 and £377-—-S)55. gcne to tIEKKEIE g; :ure Nairobi ' s t .130 O; 1 I’fibna, ch “15‘ IL'A J r us 0. ML‘ I a . . 4-1.“; ‘\. ,4 :3 H (D (D ,_. ¢ —‘ — '— 36 gone to the Uasin Gishu Plateau with the Van Rensburg trekkers.84 In 1910 Loubser painted an even more dismal picture of those who remained in the Nairobi vicinity. Near Nairobi itself one double family lived in a tent on the land of a friend. One father drove transport. Four families lived on land owned by English settlers and another two were bijwoners 332 bijwoners or hired farm hands of hired farm hands. Twelve families lived along the Athi River; three leased land. Because of a cattle quaran- tine, the families could not move, and they were retrogress- ing economically. At Kiboku there were eight families. Three leased land but two had to supplement income by riding transport to the Mt. Kenya district. Only one farmed exclusively.85 Obviously these trekkers were not finding land easier to acquire in BEA than in GEA. The position of the Colonial Office and the local administration in East Africa regarding this immigration was not directly stated. Some migrants, such as P. L. Malan, were given stiff fines for crossing the border during a cattle quarantine.86 Similarly Abraham Joubert 84Ds. Theunissen, "Britsch Cost-Afrika," Es Vereeniging, Deel VIII, no. 4, August 20, 1908, p. 57. 85M. P. Loubser, "Het Werk in Britsch Oost Afrika," De3§erkbode, Deel XXVIII, no. 10 (March 10, 1910), pp. 86Interview with P. L. Malan, August 9, 1970. gather ‘ guaranq '.‘. ’1 Nab- NA 0‘“ 4 their c c | 0335 :1", QI" , a ‘ u‘ ‘ Delta :1 (a I 37 and Willie Van Aardt had traveled to Nairobi to gain per- mission to bring their cattle into BEA; returned to GEA to gather their families, cattle and goods; and learned of a quarantine after recrossing the border. In Spite of these mitigating circumstances, the party was forced to quarantine their cattle in the Athi River area at their own expense. Soon their limited funds were expended and they were only able to maintain themselves with financial assistance from South Africa.87 W. Russell-Bowker, a prominent British South African settler, reported in a letter to The East African Standard that some Dutchmen were fined Rs.5250 (£350) for crossing the border illegally after the date of their permit had lapsed. He said they had come to him for advice because "they knew they were not looked upon by the government with a too favorable eye and that any small transgression would perhaps prejudice them against their 88 There is little doubt that those obtaining farms.” Afrikaners who crossed the border were not treated sympa- thetically by the British officials. In conclusion, the Afrikaners migrated to East Africa for a variety of reasons. Some refused to live 87Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Abraham Joubert Trek." 88East African Standard (hereafter EAS), November 3, 1906, p. 14. 33.8! t.” 'a'ar, bud German J I ”h“ \ A» HUM fiat, "‘h‘ .. H s n u. Cd 38 under the regime which had defeated them in the Anglo-Boer War, but many found themselves more dissatisfied with German colonial rule. When the Afrikaners had initially considered GEA, the Germans were receptive. A change of policy in Berlin and in East Africa between 1904 and 1906, culminated by the advent of Dernburg as the first Colonial Minister and Rechenberg as Governor in 1906, brought on immediate dissatisfaction on thegnrt of the Afrikaners. Many of them left South Africa because of the depression which followed the war, but found economic conditions in GEA far from idyllic. Finally, many migrated to East Africa because of trekgees and frontier spirit which had become a tradition in Afrikanerdom. Strict enforcement of governmental regulations, such as game licensing and tariff collection, did much to dampen the free spirits of these individuals. Rather than return to South Africa, most of the dissatisfied Afrikaners looked northward to BEA for cheap land and better conditions. Though not openly opposed to this migration, British officials did not welcome these poverty-stricken trekkers and few were able to acquire land. It was not until the immigration of the large Van Rensburg Trek of 1908 that the administration officially recognized the presence of this separate group of settlers and allocated land to them. L'Ic!‘ CHAPTER II VERGENOEG: SETTLEMENT OF UASIN GISHU PLATEAU, 1904-10 The expansion of Afrikanerdom in to East Africa was facilitated by the establishment of colonial rule in that area by the end of the nineteenth century. In BEA expenses incurred by the building and maintenance of the Uganda Railway (completed to Lake Victoria in 1901) demanded the development of territory along the line. There is consider- able disagreement among scholars about the year in which European settlement of the Highlands (as opposed to Asian settlement or African development) became the established policy of the British government.1 1C. C. Wrigley has contended that European immi- gration was a foregone conclusion before the completion of the Uganda Railway. C. C. Wrigley, "Kenya: The Patterns ‘the British Treasury." D. A. Low, "British East Africa: The Establishment of British Rule, 1395-1912," History 9_f_ 39 40 East Africa, Vol. II, ed. by Vincent Harlow, E. M. Chilver, and assisted by Alison Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), p. 21. A more careful analysis by M. P. K. Sorrenson has pointed out that policy varied at different levels of administration. Sir George Eliot, the first commissioner of BEA (1901-04), segregated the Asians and Europeans, granting the prized Highlands to the Europeans. Meanwhile the Foreign Office continued naively ”to encourage both Indian and European settlement, on the assumption that the two races could coexist without friction." Sorrenson has contended that it was probably not until 1906 that London accepted the policy of a European Highlands in BEA. Sorrenson, European Settlement, pp. 31, 32, 37, 41. Certainly not everyone in the Administration of East Africa agreed with the pro-EurOpean policies established by Eliot. This became especially evident after Eliot left his position. Frederick Jackson, an able administrator carried over from the IBEA company's administration period, was made Acting Commissioner during the absence of Sir James Sadler on leave in Britain in 1905. Jackson, with his peer S. S. Bagge's support, had consistently opposed Eliot's grants of land to Europeans. Ibid., pp. 70, 74-75. As Acting Commissioner, Jackson sent a copy of an address by the Colonists' Association of 1905 and commented on the association and the numerous complaints of the administration in the address itself. Jackson explained that the associ- ation was composed of malcontent, landless, and capital-less settlers who represented one-fourth of the European settlers. Not too much attention should be given to their demands because, quoting from the personal comments of a "world traveller," "The East African Protectorate is not, and never can be, even in the most favoured parts, a white man's country in the same sense as Canada is." Accepting this fact, said Jackson, "and remembering that the greater part of the trade of the country has been created by and still remains in the hands, either directly or indirectly, of Indians, it is the duty of His Majesty's Government to legislate for these special conditions, and not to unduly favour one race before another." Furthermore, he wryly commented: ”It is now three years since white settlers tnegan to come into this country in any numbers, but with \nary few exceptions they have contributed little or nothing tcnvards its progress, and so far as they are themselves concerned they overlook two very important factors in which nuasrt of them are deficient, means and enterprise, and with- <3t1t1 a small amount of both a man need not settle in East Africa with any hope of success." CO 879/87, Confidential Prints, African no. 771, pp. 96-97. It would seem that as Jlé113€i as December of 1905 Jackson and possibly a few other administrators of East Africa had not accepted the policy Of the pre-eminence of European immigration as an irre- ve r8 ible fait accompli. Such an unqualified attack on the u 'i an; ID '1' (D 41 While these major settlement schemes and develop- ment plans were being discussed, the Foreign Office was considering other lesser known settlement proposals, the most important of which was that of the Zionists. Although neither the London government nor the Zionists were enthusiastic about a Jewish settlement in BEA, both con- sidered this an alternative to settlement in Palestine. In 1905 the proposal was rejected by the Seventh Zionist Con- gress after a three-man investigatory committee wrote conflicting reports of the suggested settlement area, the Uasin Gishu Plateau.2 However, not all Zionists were willing to drop the scheme that quickly. Until 1907, a "Jewish Territorial Organization" under the direction of Israel Zangwill continued to work for Jewish settlement in BEA, a circumstance which caused apprehension among the British settlers.3 position of the settlers would seem unthinkable and pur- poseless otherwise. Though policy may not have been entrenched at this point, particularly after the Protector- ate was transferred from the Foreign Office to the Colonial Office, continued European immigration and land purchases ‘preempted policy decisions. For further discussion on the .Eliot period see his own book, The East African Protectorate (London: Edward Arnold, 1905), especially CBS. IX-XII; also see Robert Alan Remole, "White Settlers or the Foundation of Ehlropean Agricultural Settlement in Kenya" (unpublished .Pfl.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1959). ~ 2For a complete account of this affair, see Robert G. Weisbord, African Zion, the Attempt to Establish a Jewish Colon in the East Africa Protectorate, 1903-I905 Tplilladelp 1a: The Jewish Publication SociEty of Ameffca, 1963). In particular see pp. 81-97, 198-223. 3Ibid., pp. 224-49. Additional requests for land we re received from a clergyman who was fostering American ‘ '3. fl 5“.“ Us; I 1' able}: aauzers ‘ h ourag; .van “4"“ rm rEan, 42 The Zionist scheme occasioned discussion among the European settlers concerning "types" of settlers.4 In a pamphlet directed Specifically against the Zionist scheme, Lord Delamere objected to the principle of harboring an ”alien state” within the Protectorate, to giving land to paupers and those who spoke a foreign language, to en- couraging small plot farming in BEA, to admitting those with no capital, and to taking land which would be ideal for the settlement of the British and their colonials.5 Two years later much the same view was expressed by Lord Hindlip, one of the aristocrats involved in East Africa before World War I, when the Zionist scheme was reaching its climax shortly after their exploratory expedition in late 1904. Hindlip suggested that the land had been negro colonization, a champion of the persecuted Nestorian Christians of Turkey, and by a Prince Maximilian Lieven from Estonia who wished to secure a haven for Russian Germans. For communications regarding Lieven's scheme, see CO 879/92, no. 844, serial no. 194, Lieven to CO, June 13, 1906; serial no. 207, CO to Lieven, June 19, 1906; serial no. 226, Lieven to CO, July 13, 1906; serial no. 359, F0 to CO, September 21, 1906; and serial no. 387, CO to Lieven, October 9, 1906. The Foreign Office was asked to comment on his request and reported adversely regarding the character of Lieven. Significantly, the Colonial Office did not .re8pond negatively to Lieven without considerable investi- sgation. The Colonial Office did not view the Highlands as a1: exclusive reserve for British malcontents. 4See Weisbord, African Zion, pp. 81-97 for settler reactions to the scheme. 5Lord Delamere, "The Grant of Lord to the Zionist Congress and Land Settlement in British East Africa" (tr-3 I “V“ or - l V u-u n “‘OU‘NQ I were 3 50 National Scouts and assisted the British with their knowledge of the land. Still others had given up too quickly and were known as "hands-uppers." The last groups were held in such contempt by the "bitter-enders" that a severe division in Afrikanerdom resulted. Le May, a historian of this period, has pointed out that it was one of the primary goals of Louis Botha, the leader of the ESE Volk party, to overcome this division and unite Afrikaner- dom- 21 In spite of Botha's efforts some districts remained solidly anti-British and would not tolerate "traitorous" Boers in their midst. All those knowledgeable Afrikaners interviewed affirmed that there were "hands-uppers" or Lgikopszz in the Van Rensburg trek and the 1911 Cloete trek. Furthermore it was admitted by most that the ostracism of these people in South Africa by their anti-British com- Patriots was a reason for their migration to East Africa. A SubStantial difference of opinion occurred over the number of roikops who participated in the two treks and Whether indeed their leaders were roikops. For the Van “ 21See Le May, British Supremacy, pp, 137, 173-74, and 214-15. 22The term roikoE meaning "red head" appears to be one which developed exclusively in East Africa. None of the South Africans with whom the author conversed knew of the tierm and those who migrated to East Africa after World at 11 seemed unaware of the term. Though no one knew exaCtly how it came into use, it is surmised that it was a gaFOSIY of the term frequently used by the Afrikaners for rltlsh troops, roinek, or "red neck." Sl Rensburg trek estimates ranged from a few to over half of the party. There is no doubt that this issue was a major cause for the migration of some of these Afrikaners to British-dominated territory from a homeland which was at that time either assured of independence or, in the case of the Cloete trek, already had it. The Van Rensburg group numbering between 200 and 300 persons, left their homes on June 19 and boarded the German ship "Windhoek" in Delagoa Bay on July 1.23 The group arrived at Mombasa on July 8 and were met by a train — 23F. J. Smit, "Die Voortrekkers," p. 19. According to C- J. Roets there were 57 families with wagons, trek- 90038 and horses. He claimed that the ship cost the party £1750. Aucamp reported that there were ‘70 families with 200 persons, 39 buck-wagons, 4 carts, and 69 horses and that the Ship cost £2000. Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Van Rensburg Trek- " The official "Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure" reported that there were 47-50 families with 24S souls, 4‘7 wagons and ‘70 horses, and that the ship cost 51750, p. 20. The LBEA reported: ”The trek consists in all of about 300 souls or about 80 heads of families, with adult sons and daughters and children. The impedimenta included 70 horses, OX-Waggons, 10 Cape carts, fowls, cats, spare waggon tyres, forges, waggon wheels and all the appurtenances for veld Se ttlement.” The group had many rifles and much ammunition. Finally, "together with the Boer families, a number of Cape Boys and Hottentot servants are included, and these again have brought their wives and families." July 18, 1908, p. 3. A letter from the Governor of the Prcte(31:.orate to the Secretary of State dated July 22, 1908, Stated that there were 50 families in the party with 254 Persons and 7 servants, totaling 310 persons including those Who had come the previous month. This report also indi- cated that they had 38 wagons, 70 horses and a considerable (tillantity of goods. (These are the only two references to e Presence of Hottentots or Africans from South Africa in e treks, No trace of these servants was found in 1969 then the author was present on the Uasin Gishu. Presumably e? either died off or were absorbed into local African 1 i .1 52 reserved for them.24 This train brought them directly to Nakuru where they disembarked and camped on the farms of Frans Arnoldi and a neighbor.25 During their journey, Van Rensburg had stopped in Nairobi to confer with the Com- missioner of Lands, Montgomery. Since he could not speak English he had asked Mr. Glieman, a Dane who knew both English and Afrikaans, to join the party and act as inter- preter. Through Glieman, Montgomery informed Van Rensburg that surveyed land was available in the southern part of the Uasin Gishu.26 While the main party waited on Arnoldi's land, a committee of seven or eight was sent to reconnoiter that area. This committee did not like this surveyed area and Van Rensburg and Glieman returned to Nairobi and in- formed the Commissioner of Lands that they objected to the surveyed area as well as to the preliminary fees for appli- cation for land (BS) and to the necessity to show means equal to the development required. The migration of Boers to the Protectorate presented a difficult situation for the Colonial Office and the local administration. These Afrikaners were not migrating to East Africa with administrative approval. Before the Van 24Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Van Rensburg Trek," and 25F. J. Smit, "Die Voortrekkers," p. 20. 26CO 879/101, No. 921, serial no. 93, Governor to Secretary of State, March 4, 1909. :8"; (My. ’ ask ““HEI (I) (I) '1 53 Rensburg trekkers landed at Kilindini Harbor in Mombasa, Governor Hayes-Sadler had telegraphed the Colonial Secretary regarding their forthcoming arrival and asked how to handle the group. He indicated that some of them had written him a few months earlier stating their intentions and he had advised them that there were no accommodations for such a large group. Not realizing that Van Rensburg had already been to the Protectorate, he advised them to send delegates first. They had not heeded his instructions and had come as a group. Therefore, he presented this question to the Colonial Secretary: "Your Lordship would not, I presume, wish any discrimination to be now made between Boers and other British subjects in the matter of grants of land, but it appears to me that we must be careful if immigration continues on this scale, otherwise there is danger of most "27 The of available land being monopolized by Boers. Secretary replied that no distinction should be made between Boer and Briton but the Restriction of Immigration Ordinance concerning the need to show means of support should be strictly adhered to.28 Obviously both the Colonial Office and the local administration had strong reservations about Afrikaner immigration into the Protectorate. However, in contrast to the earlier settlement schemes for the Uasin 27CO 879/99, No. 914, serial no. 213, Governor to Secretary of State, July 6, 1908. . 28L§£§., serial no. 215, Secretary of State to Governor, July 9, 1908. 3'.“ kn \J'o Hi, trati: S4 Gishu, the Van Rensburg trekkers presented the adminis- tration with a fait accompli by their arrival at Kilindini. Considering its ambivalent attitudes towards the Afrikaners, the administration was surprisingly accommo- dating on the matter of what land was to be made available to them. After Van Rensburg informed the administration of his refusal to settle on the surveyed land, he was told that his party would have to wait until additional land was surveyed. Again he objected because of the expense the entire party would incur maintaining themselves while the survey was made.29 After further negotiations the governor promised Van Rensburg a block of unsurveyed land, and the Commissioner of Lands informed him that his group could apply at the rate of 3,000 acres per farmer, with the stipulation that improvements be made on the land comparable to forty times the annual rent within five years. There- fore the Afrikaners asked for 165,000 acres of land for 55 farmers. When the actual application was made, the Land Office demanded that the settlers must show means worth forty times the annual rent before the application for the block could be approved. The Afrikaners then went directly to the Colonial Secretary and asked him to overrule the local administration. Their letter contended that they had capital worth £10,000, less than half of the amount needed 29Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Van Rensburg Trek." of he orderh meats but t: 67 U) (7 55 for the acreage desired.30 The Liberal Secretary, the Earl of Crewe, responded to their plea by urging, though not ordering, Hayes-Sadler to insist that £400 worth of improve- ments on each farm should be made by the end of five years but that the capital should not be insisted upon before the 31 When the governor and his subordinates grant was given. objected, Crewe agreed to demand a show of means before the grants were given but asked that the amount be cut in half, or twenty times the annual rent.32 With £10,000 capital the Afrikaners should have been able to acquire all of the desired acreage. While these communiqués were passing between Nairobi and London, the trekkers had gone to the Plateau and many had marked off individual farms. Consequently the Land Office had returned to its policy of approving individual applications for land rather than turning over a whole block to the group. Under these circumstances the Afri- kaners had paid the fees for 27 farms in the unmarked area of the Uasin Gishu.33 3Oco a79/99, No. 914, serial no. 306, Messrs. Glieman, Van Rensburg, and others to Colonial Office, September 9, 1908. 311bi§., serial no. 316, Secretary of State to Governor, October 14, 1908. 32$§i§., serial no. 375, Secretary of State to Governor, December 8, 1908. 33Later, the Commissioner of Lands Montgomery, contended that already in early 1909 the Afrikaners were ‘5 m... .933 O a. 5.1. m5: C 3 b ”I capit €31 ' h . s I e ”14“ t.» I ‘Pu ”we a. a ”U; m.» e A» s .u . .J. n .r. u! f s. ‘5 nu; nun x. «Q L . 56 Even at the lower figure of twenty times the annual rent, Montgomery questioned whether the Boers had the capital necessary for 27 farms. Scholefield, a surveyor sent to mark the farms, had reported to him that there were a few men, such as Van Rensburg, with means, and these men were lending sufficient funds to the others to begin farming. Apparently, it was because of this lack of capital that Montgomery had not granted all of the 27 farms applied for. By 1909 Montgomery and Scholefield were no longer predisposed to cooperate any more than was necessary with the Boers. They believed Glieman, the interpreter, to be a thoroughly disreputable fellow. Scholefield reported that even the Boers called him a man without money or principle. Furthermore, said Scholefield, "If what I hear is true, he and the Boers think they can do whatever they like, and that they can coerce us."34 The applications were not processed quarreling over boundaries of their properties in this un- beaconed area, justifying in his eyes the refusal to grant a large block to the group. He personally had settled these cases and had granted eighteen farms and had given options for five more. 34cc 879/101, No. 921, serial no. 93, enclosures in Governor to Secretary of State, March 4, 1909. Not all members of every level of the administration were similarly adverse to Afrikaner immigration. When the assessor was touring the area attempting to determine the value of the capital of those Afrikaners who had applied for land, he was invited in for something to eat and drink by one of the families. He accepted with the remark that the poor cattle needed a rest as well as he. Of course, the cattle were being shunted from one farmer to the other to enhance the capital value of each farmer. Interview with Mr. and Mrs. J. Boshoff, June 2, 1969. until allot adver Van W part} towai late} QUicI I! (f 7 :1" :7 57 until May, 1909 when farms were granted under the "rapid allotment" scheme.35 It would seem that despite the adverse opinions which some officials in BEA held of the Van Rensburg trek, the sheer size and organization of the party forced the administration to be somewhat lenient towards them. One member of the party declared two years later that this group was very fortunate to get land so quickly after their arrival. The earlier immigrants had to wait much longer to have their applications processed and approved.36 Had the Van Rensburg trekkers not been granted farms so expeditiously, it is probable that most of them would have been forced back to South Africa within a few years. On September 14 the party began their trek from Nakuru to the Plateau. Because of the terrain and the forests, and with untrained oxen pulling the wagons, the journey was difficult. They arrived near Sergoit Rock on October 19, chose their farms, and moved to their respective choices on the twenty-first of October.37 35KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, Political Record File, "European Settlement." 36Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Van Rensburg Trek." 37For an imaginative account of the hardships of this trek, see Elspeth Huxley, N2 Easy Way, pp. 59-61. Another account was given by A. C. Hoey, a prominent British settler, who was sitting on Sergoit Rock watching game when he noticed the vanguard of western civilization moving into his excellent hunting grounds. Egg, January 9, 1939, pp. 11 and 15. Also see Smit, "Die Voortrekkers," pp. 20-22; 58 The reaction of the unofficial community in the Protectorate was mixed, though generally positive. The LBEA, the first Nairobi-based newspaper, was positively pro-Boer. Before the migration had begun, this paper quoted a Transvaal paper: "I hope the Boers who are thinking of trekking from the Transvaal to British East Africa are seriously studying the conditions which prevail in the land they contemplate making their home." The editors concluded that comments of this type were inimical to East Africa, ”for after all it is from the South that we can hope for the earliest trek to these lands."38 The EAS, which was still based in Mombasa at this time, initially favored the migration, though its support was considerably more restrained than that of the LEEA. Three days after the Boer's arrival in Mombasa, the editors of the §§§ wrote an editorial entitled, "A New Colony--Sudden Increase of Settlers-~An Epoch.” The editors noted that the increase in settlers was due to a "trek" of importance of our brother colonists from the South. There is every prospect of ten times this number making their homes among us provided we hold out the hand of welcome to this advanced guard of long- haired, long bearded, independent but deserving people. "Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure," pp. 20-21; and KNA, DC/ UG/2/1, Political Record File, ”European Settlement." The last source stated that the group arrived at the Sergoit River on October 14. 38LBEA, June 6, 1908, p. 4. at: .oav 4 on o ". fur! vatj abs: men: “a sue 59 The editor reported that these settlers wished to unite with those Afrikaners already in the Protectorate and settle in one Afrikaner area "in order that educational and religious facilities may be more easily obtained."39 The following week the 2225 published a more sub- stantive editorial on the effects which this group of settlers would have on the Protectorate. After praising the Boer's pugnacious qualities, the editor enumerated further "virtues and vices" of the Boers. "He is conser- vative, steadfast, patient and domestic. He is also obstinate, not very progressive, and though not failing in mental stamina and personality, is unintellectual.“ But the editor believed that this was a move in "the right direction" so far as the settler community was concerned. He listed five areas in which the Boers would contribute to this community: (1) increase its size: (2) strengthen its defense; (3) open new regions; (4) beneficially effect native policy; and (5) provide "the occasion of a fair test for the other South Africans to profit by." The editor had no illusions about the scientific farming techniques of the Boers, for, in his estimation, they had none. As for the treatment of Africans, the editor said: The Boer treatment of the natives is more patriarchal than harsh. They do not pander to native proclivities, but simply take him and deal with him as master and servant, invite his presence on the farms, permit him his own cattle and lands, but insist upon his service 39EAS, July 11, 1908, p. 11. AJU «HU- ”.1 Po mi Vs ‘h‘ «5 any 2. 60 at a reasonable rate of wage. They understand the native better than the Englishman--even better than the trained Englishman--even better than the average Native or Provincial Commissioner-~and their presence in the midst of the native tribes can trend but for good for their methods with natives are based upon guile meeting guile and not violence meeting violence. When strife becomes inevitable the Boers generally give a good account of themselves, but generally speaking they are not a disturbing factor in contact with natives, but a controlling factor. For this arrival of this contingent of Boer families marks a promising epoch in the history of the land.40 Two months later the LB A had not changed its position. Under the title "The Boer Trek, Are the Grapes Sour?" it reprinted an article from the Usambara £233. In part it read: Day by day the men go off shooting, both on horse and afoot, and the pandemonium which prevails everywhere is endless. Soon the beauty of this wild spot will be destroyed unless the English Government intervenes quickly. . . . At Nakuru, I also met some Boers who had formerly been settled among us at Meru, but who had trekked off to settle in BEA. Of course, they grumbled bitterly about BEA (1) because the climate there is unhealthy, (2) because one can't even begin to do any— thing with the nigger, (3) because their cattle got stolen. Well, the motive of their trek may well be that their hunting is stopped [presumably in South Africa]. We in German East Africa can at least be thankful that we have not been blessed with these 500 Boers.41 The reaction of individual colonialists to the Boers was mixed. E. S. Grogen made this enigmatic comment: 40LBEA, July 18, 1908, p. 4. What was meant by the phrase, ”the occasion for a fair test for the other South Africans to profit by” is not clear. 41LBEA, September 19, 1908, p. 6. Though the author of this article exaggerated the situation in the British Protectorate, he may well have been very sincere about his dislike of additional Boer settlers in GEA. IF’H he SEtt. 61 ”The Boer, being a true 'amaeboid' makes the finest possible settler in a new country, but a 'metazoan' leaven is essential to rapid development."42 A few months later the EAS reported that H. H. Johnston noted a great deal of similarity between the goals of the Boers and those of the Jews regarding the settlement and establishment of an autonomous state. He opposed both.43 As was noted earlier, Hindlip also opposed Boer immigration as he opposed Jewish immigration. The primary political organ of the settlers, the Colonists' Association, supported the Boers in their quest for land in the Protectorate. This organization was domi- nated by British South Africans. The association sent a resolution to the governor dated August 8, 1908, which urged him to make land available to these new immigrants. The governor's response was to assure the association that land was available for occupation by the Boers but that they had been unable to proceed to it because of lack of trans— 44 portation. Though the Colonists' Association did not represent all of the settler community, it would appear 42LBEA, August 8, 1908, p. 6. 43EAS, October 31, 1903, p. 16. 44LBEA, August 22, 1908, p. 6. 62 that the majority of the settlers with little capital either approved of or were apathetic to this immigration.45 In conclusion, the reception which the Afrikaners received in BEA was mixed. Officials were fearful of the growth of a large, domineering Afrikaner settler community and discouraged immigration by the Afrikaners whenever possible. On the other hand officials did not wish to appear openly discriminatory and were therefore compelled to cooperate, though reluctantly. Those settlers and colonists with interest in BEA were divided on the merits of this new immigrant group. Lord Hindlip, H. H. Johnston, and as will be seen in the next chapter, Lord Cranworth opposed Afrikaner immigration. Grogan's enigmatic statement defies categorization. No reference was found to Lord Delamere's opinion on the matter. Though the EAS did not outrightly oppose Afrikaner immigration, it seemed to prefer capitalists from the homeland. The LE 5 outspokenly supported the immigration of the Afrikaners as did the Colonists' Association. This mixed reaction to Afrikaner 45This does not mean that there was no one who Opposed the immigration of the Boers. Latent anti-Boer sentiments were present in the settler community and sur- faced within a few years. See below, ch. III, pp. 75-83. What effect the relative positions of the Europeans Vis-a-vis the Africans and Indians had on stifling the <3Ppositi on is unmeasurab 1e . -4 u . _,-“v a . 63 immigration was the first symptom of the on-going distrust which existed between the Uasin Gishu settlers and those of the rest of the colony, between the Afrikaners and some British settlers and the Afrikaners and the administration. ,- ‘4 Aw. Via. pr CHAPTER III THE COMMUNITY PERSISTS: PATTERNS OF RELATIONSHIPS ESTABLISHED: 1910-18 The first settlers on the Uasin Gishu found life difficult during the early years. Their greatest difficul- ties were those common to most settlement frontiers: virgin soil which needed considerable work before it became productive: no housing; few merchants (initially only Asian itinerant merchants): and no reliable transportation and communication with the outside world. Despite these problems there was much optimism in the community. They were satisfied with the climate and the soil. Water was adequate but not abundant. By mid-1909 most of the settlers had built thatched rondavels, though Van Rensburg was prepared to build a more substantial stone house. Illus- trative of the community's efforts to tame this region, thirty-seven lions had been shot during the preceding ten months.1 Though lions were a threat to domestic stock, the Presence of other wild game prevented starvation from ; 1Lash, July 31, 1909, p. 7. 64 "6.8V. i530 65 visiting the homes of many of the Afrikaners during the first few years.2 Meanwhile, domestic animals multiplied rapidly and were relatively disease-free. Oats, maize and wheat were immediately planted for personal consumption and all crops were satisfactory.3 As could be expected some immigrants were not satisfied and returned to South Africa. Usually the major complaint concerned the land regulations and the difficulty which one with little or no capital had of becoming a land owner. Those who had no capital were forced to become bygoners and some believed that it was better to be a bywoner in one's own Vaderland than in a foreign land. After hearing complaints from a few returnees, Ds. J. M. Louw pessimistically commented: It is to be deplored that our people, either well-off or poor, ever trekked to East Africa. Their prospects are not promising and meanwhile they are destitute of many privileges, especially in the religious, social, and educational areas.4 Another member of the Van Rensburg Trek wrote: If any one wants to farm here he must have money. For a poor man there is no chance whatsoever to get on. . . . Do not think to make money by hunting. To hunt costs too much money in licenses for guns, and car- tridges, and then you are not allowed to sell or export a skin. This is only a country for Government 2Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Van Rensburg Trek." 3Smit, "Die Voortrekkers," pp. 22-23. 4Louw, "Naar Duitsch en Britsch Dost-Afrika,” part VI, De Vereeniging, Deel VIII, no. 11, November 26, 1908, pp. 172-73 0 tn. 7! O. .O h \l‘ I? a I a 5 e 3.. en 0 Fl. st ~\ H v“\ Pks ‘5..14. use...‘ is at. .53.. .me it .. 66 officials, missionaries, rich men . . . and for natives and coolies.5 In spite of the dissatisfaction of a few, a small but continuous flow of Afrikaner immigrants arrived in East Africa throughout the pre-World War I period. The largest group after 1908 was that led by C. J. Cloete, a prominent farmer from the Bethlehem district of the Orange Free State. Cloete had visited the Uasin Gishu prior to the organization of the trek and approved of the area.6 Cloete leased the German ship, the ”S. S. Skramstad," had it fitted with stalls for livestock, and was joined by sixty fellow Orange Free State emigrants. The party left Durban on March 1, 1911, with 120 Afrikander cattle, 80 horses (at least 34 of which were Cloete's), and 530 merino sheep.7 They arrived 5Letter by Nico Postma, LBEA, August 20, 1910, p. 3. 6The EAS reported that he had visited the Protec- torate in 1910—but his son, Anacreon Cloete, who was in his late teens or early twenties when the trek occurred, claimed that Cloete had investigated the Plateau before the Van Rensburg party had arrived and had in fact met them at Molo on his return to South Africa. EAS, March 25, 1911, p. 5; interview with A. Cloete, August-I6, 1969. 7This information was found in the private papers of C. J. Cloete, held by his son, A. Cloete, of Rosetta, Natal. The numbers of livestock were found in a document issued to Cloete by the Orange River Colony administration permitting him to export those numbers of livestock. The EAS gave these figures: 100 horses (one of which was a race horse), 120 cattle (of which there were 40 Afrikander cows and 4 bulls, one of championship class), and 800 sheep. The discrepancies may be due to erroneous reporting by the EAS, or the party may have taken more livestock than their permit stipulated, or the permit was issued for Cloete only and the other trekkers took additional stock. Which- ever is the case, it is certain that this group of trekkers, and particularly Cloete, had a substantial amount of capital. 67 on the Uasin Gishu in May of 1911 and within a month Cloete 8 had purchased a farm for B4500. Cloete was probably the most affluent of all the East African trekkers. The immigrants began replicating Afrikaner insti- tutions shortly after their arrival in BEA. Two clergymen, J. M. Louw and N. Thenunissen, were sent to visit the uitgewekene of East AfriCa in mid-1908 by the moderator of the Transvaal NGK. On August 29, 1908, on the farm of Frans Arnoldi, the Vergenoeg Church was established by Louw, the name vergenoeg having been taken from Louw's comment that the trekkers of the Afrikaner nation had now gone "far 9 The first resident predikant in East Africa, enough." M. P. Loubser, arrived in 1909. Sent by the Transvaal church, he was commissioned to serve the Afrikaner com- munities in both British and German East Africa. Loubser was to be associated with the East Africans until his BLBEA, May 27, 1911, p. 13; and June 10, 1911, p. 7. 9"Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure," pp. 22-23: Louw, "Naar Duitsch en Britsch Cost-Afrika," pp. 172-73; and N. Theunissen, "Britsch Cost-Afrika," Es Vereeniging, Deel VIII, no. 4, August 20, 1908, p. 57. One account quoted Louw: "We have gone far enough in the things of the world and lived in them. Back to Christ now, search the things which are above, where Christ is." Nicolaas W. Smith, "Die Voortrekkers na Cos-Afrika," 923 Afrika, Deel II, no. 1, 0. fi"" - v .1 LI 0“, ' r? (7‘ (f (1' n. 68 death in the mid-thirties, though he did not serve them as pastor continuously.lo The first church building was built of bamboo on one of the Afrikaner's farms.ll In 1913 a site was given to the church by the Britisher Ortlepp, across the Sosiani River from the newly selected administrative center of the Plateau.12 The first permanent building was completed on this site in 1921. Though the other two Afrikaner churches were not as large as the NGK, they established themselves almost as quickly. The GK was organized on August 13, 1909, 13 Their first by a visiting predikant, J. J. R. du Plessis. building was not completed until 1930. The NHK was formed in late 1910 on the farm of Van Rensburg and was named after this leader, Rensburgrus. Though many Hervormers had joined the NGK earlier, there were over thirty charter members of loAn unpublished biography of Loubser was written as a thesis at the University of Pretoria by Ernest Rex entitled ”Die Werk van Ds. M. P. Loubser Veral in Brits-Oos Afrika (Kenia) en Duits-Oos Afrika (Tanzanie)," 1967. Also see ch. IV for further discussion of Loubser and his major publication, Onse Uitgewekene. 11"Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure," pp. 23-24; F. J. Smit, ”Die Voortrekkers," p. 19. 12KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1913. Also "Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure,” p. 26. 13Letter from A. L. Aucamp, Die Kerkblad, December 20, 1933, p. 940. 69 of this new congregation. Their first building in Eldoret was dedicated in 1921.14 The persistence of these ecclesiastical divisions among the small group of Afrikaners in Kenya caused one DC to comment: "It is a cause of congratulation that the Dutch cannot agree in religion, anymore than in anything 15 As the DC hinted, the divisions within the com- else.” munity were more than ecclesiastical. Some claimed that the NHK was the haven for most of the roikops and that this was a reason for conflict between the churches. Another example of divisiveness occurred with the death of C. J. Cloete. Not only wealthy, Cloete was also the most articulate spokesman for the Afrikaners during this early period. Prior to the Anglo-Boer War he had been a member of the Orange Free State Legislative Assembly. Shortly after his arrival in East Africa he was appointed to serve on the Land Board and selected as a delegate to the Convention of Associations.16 At the one Land Board 14C. J. Mans, "Vyftig Jaar Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk in Cos-Afrika," Hervormde Telogiese Studies, Jaargang 20, p. 183. 15 KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1913. 16For a description of the founding and function of the Land Board see George Bennett, "Settlers and Politics in Kenya," found in HistoEy 22 East Africa, edited by Vincent Harlow, E. M. C 1 ver, and assisted by Alison Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), vol. II, pp. 276-78 and 283; and George Bennett, Ken a, A Political Histor (London: Oxford University Press, I963), pp. 22, g1-32. h. 9’ 70 meeting which he attended on January 8, 1912, Cloete, as one of eight unofficials, made resolutions asking for more liberality in the transfer of rights to land, less stringent definitions of ”improvements" demanded by the Lands Office, and lower rents on grazing areas.17 Concerning the 99-year lease clause and the 33-year rental revisions of the Crown Lands Ordinance of 1902, Cloete made this analogy: This law has too much of the principle of the Mosaic law in it. It is not just. However great a legislator Moses may have been, I do not think he is a suitable authority to copy from. If correctly reported he practiced witchcraft and made snakes, which is quite enough to cause me to suspect his good intentions. Cloete had carried the same message concerning land laws to the Convention of Associations meeting in August of the previous year and had supported the cause of the small land- holders over against those of the large land-holders.19 In a letter to the LBEA only a few months after his arrival in the Protectorate, Cloete expressed satisfaction with the agricultural and pastoral potential of the land. He claimed to have discovered the carrier of a disease (probably East 17LBEA, January 13, 1912, p. 7; and January 27, 1912, p. 85: Minutes of Land Board of January 8, 1912, private papers, C. J. Cloete; EAS, August 5, 1911, pp. 6-10. 18LBEA, January 27, 1912, p. 8b. 19sas, August 5, 1911, pp. 6-10: and LBEA, August 5, IgIl, pp. 5-7. For discussions of this con- flict between the large and small land-holders, see Bennett, "Settlers and Politics in Kenya," pp. 282-83: and Sorren- son, Eurgpean Settlement, pp. 83-98. 'U (f '1 .l u u .1. 71 Coast fever) which was plaguing the livestock owners of the Plateau. As for the administration and its policy towards the Africans, he sarcastically stated: Really, Sir, I do not see why one should complain; true there is a bit of sheep stealing going on. Some of my neighbours complain a good deal, but so far only five of my imported sheep are gone; but that is nothing, considering every advantage one enjoys here, such as the ideal and equitable climate and the primitive freedom, paradisaical social life one here enjoys, and primitive laws hitherto applied which reminds one of the Jehovic and Mosaic criminal laws. . . . The losses by theft seem to give still more freedom than the oldest Mosaic, or more properly speaking, Hamuramic laws, for they adjoin that if one steals sheep from his neighbour he will have to return two. Here the Elgeyo steals with evident impunity.20 Cloete's former position in the Orange Free State, his obvious erudition, and his wealth, earned him the respect of the administration. Very quickly he became the link between the administration and the Afrikaner community. His Afrikaner heritage was not denied but his rational, theosophical views and possibly less than ardent pro-Boer sentiments during the war placed him one cut above the ordinary Afrikaner in the eyes of the administration. However, Cloete died of malaria in mid-1912. The Uasin Gishu DC lamented that his death was "an incalculable loss to the government which he supported loyally and influ- entially against the anti-English faction. There is no body at present to take his place."21 Both the newspapers 2OLBEA, October 21, 1911, p. 13. 21KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1913. 72 eulogized him, though the LBEA more eloquently. It called him a great farmer and reader. He was also a great expounder of Darwinism, theosophy, and Christian Science. Being a scientist of no small demeanor, the old exploded stories of the world being flat was naturally ridiculed [sic], and this was the cause of his being misjudged by some of his neighbours; some even thought him an atheist. Cloete was accepted within the British community without reservation, for he was "'quite English you know' though of a provincial-colonial type."23 Cloete's acceptance within the Afrikaner community was not equally unequivocal. His unorthodox religious beliefs, his advocacy of Afrikaner integration into the British community and his participation in British-dominated colonial organizations alienated him from his countrymen. This alienation was apparent in the comments made by another Afrikaner at his funeral. The LBEA reporter said of them: Great indignation was felt by all present at the way the man spoke. Instead of consoling the bereaved wife and family, he condemned them, saying that God was not known in the household; that there was no true religion in it; in fact he made himself their judge.24 The death of Cloete dealt a severe blow to advocates of integration with the English community. But Afrikaner 22LBEA, July 27, 1912, p. 17. Also see EAS, July 13, 19T27 p. 24. “‘ 23LBEA, July 13, 1912, p. 11. 24LBEA, July 27, 1912, p. 17. ‘4 A ~ 73 xenophobia could not prevent British settlers from settling on the Plateau.25 By March of 1911 there were 97 non- Afrikaner landholders who owned 121 surveyed farms and 62 Afrikaner landholders who owned 57 farms. This is not an accurate reflection of the relative size of the two com— 26 Thus, munities since many Afrikaners did not own farms. within a few years after the settlement of the Uasin Gishu, there was a British community on the Plateau which nearly equalled that of the Afrikaners. The census of 1911 reported 448 Europeans but the residents claimed that 700 27 Considering the size would be a more realistic figure. of the Van Rensburg trek (250 to 300), the Cloete trek (about 60), the migrants from GEA, many of whom had moved to the Plateau by this date, and additional immigration of small groups, the Afrikaners must have numbered at least 400 in that district. The total number of Afrikaners in BEA including those who continued to live at Athi River and Thika and around Nakuru is estimated to have been between 500 and 600.28 25KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, Political Record File, "Settlers." 26KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1910- ll. Surnames were used to determine nationality. 27LBEA, October 21, 1911, p. 8. 281n 1914 there were reportedly 20 families in the Nairobi area. A. P. Burger, "Naar Oost Afrika," part II, 22 Kerkbode, Deel V, no. 33, p. 762. 74 The total population of the Plateau grew very rapidly after 1911. The LBEA reported 900 residents in 1912,29, 1,220 residents in 1913,30 31 and a reduction to 1,177 in 1916. Already in 1912 the LBEA reporter from the Plateau confidently declared: "I believe it is the most densely populated district in the Colony, for out of the 250 farms nearly every one is occupied, in fact many are now waiting . . . for the other part [the Trans—Nzoia district] to be surveyed."32 The integration of British and Afrikaner settlers was resisted by substantial elements in both communities. From her own experience, Elspeth Huxley described the relationship of these two national groups: The Afrikaners who came from South Africa to populate the Plateau were, in fact, almost as foreign to the English as Chinese, and between the two peoples there arose, as in the South, a peculiar relationship of mingled respect and contempt. The Afrikaners were clannish, many could speak little or no English and memories of the Boer War were fresh. The English felt that this was their colony, and that the Afrikaners were contributing little to it in the way of capital, skill and interest in public affairs. But the Dutch, in their hearts, believed that they were the only true colonists. They were the ones who could live on the country, in it and of it, as Africans do. To them the English, 29LBEA, July 13, 1912, p. 10. 3OKNA, DC/UG/l/l, DC District Annual Report, 1913. 311bid., 1916. 32LBEA, March 30, 1912, p. 9. {1: 75 basically, were uitlanders, and upstarts who (in their view) knew nothing of Africa's harsh ways. Contempt for the other community was manifested in many forms throughout the colonial period in Kenya. Neither side respected the farming techniques of the other. One Boer letter to South Africa praised the Afrikaners' develop- ment on the Uasin Gishu and noted: "They are the only ones that go in for farming, the English here do not go in for 34 anything but 'safariing,‘ as they call it." In 1909 Lord Hindlip characterized the Boers as idle, destructive nomads: The influx from South Africa and German East Africa bodes ill to the game and no good to the colony. These people kill game, but they "toil not, neither do they spin” more than is absolutely necessary to keep body and soul together. Very aware of this kind of stereotyping of the Afrikaners, Jan Van Rensburg emphasized the ambitious work of the Plateau Boers to a reporter in 1909: Mr. Van Rensburg alluded to the prejudice still, un- fortunately, held against the Boer, on the score that he does not work. He assures us that work, and plenty of it, of a reproductive character has been accom- plished.36 33Elspeth Huxley, N2 Eas Way (Nairobi: East Afri- can Standard Ltd., 1957), P. 57. - 34Letter sent by W. J. Rait to the Cape Frontier Guardian and reprinted in the LBEA, December 4, I909, p. 4. BSLBEA, March 20, 1909, p. 5. 36LBEA, July 31, 1909, p. 7. 76 The Afrikaner's negative image persisted however. One of the most damning comments came from Governor Belfield in a report of a Uasin Gishu visit in 1913. After ex- pressing satisfaction with the progress of the agriculture of "the men of means, both English and South African," (referring to South African British) Belfield made these comments about the Boers: In consequence of communications from individual settlers, . . . I arrived in the district under the impression that most of the Boer community were living a "hand-to-mouth" existence in a condition of distressing indigence. The information given to me locally, both by the English settlers and by farmers of their own nationality, was however, sufficient to disabuse my mind once and for all of any such idea. It is, perhaps, un- fortunate that when these people first arrived in the country they were all allotted farms on the plateau without concern as to whether they had or had not the means and intention to develop them.37 But it soon became obvious that they had neither. The present position, however, is that the Boer arrived here in the role of a vagrant pauper, and is at this moment better off than his most optimistic anticipations could have led him to expect. For development of his land he cares nothing. Having rigged up a shanty, . . . and having scratched over a sufficiency of soil to supply mealies for the family consumption, his domestic exertions are ended. Thereafter the antelopes provide him with more meat than he can consume, their hides supply him with rugs, shoes, and harness material, and, having laid out what funds he possesses in a wagon and a team of oxen, he is equipped for a career of profit-making, entailing little or no further outlay. He does practically all the transport work between the plateau and other parts of the country. . . . When the rain commences, and transport becomes more difficult, he takes up ploughing contract work for the farming settlers. In consequence of the expansion of agriculture the demand for ploughing help is already in excess of the supply; . . . the rate 37This is an oversimplification of the situation, if not quite inaccurate. See ch. II, pp. 54-56 for dis- cussion of capital requirements. 77 per acre for ploughing contract was already from two to three shillings higher than that prevailing in the previous season. The Boer on the plateau is on the way to amass money, but he will never do any good with the extensive areas of land which have been allotted to him, and I would put no obstacle in the way of his disposing of it to the "bona fide" farmer. 3 Of course, this report to the Colonial Secretary was not made public. Two public manifestations of the differ- ences between the British and Afrikaners did occur in 1912 and 1916. The first was precipitated by comments made by the British aristocrat, Lord Cranworth, in his new book, A Colony ig_thg Making. He said that: "The Boer, as a Boer, is no more unacceptable in the Protectorate than in other parts of the Empire." But, In 1908 there was an influx of Boers, of whom it would not be too much to say that they left their country for their country's good. They arrived pretty well destitute. . . . They applied for farms. Now the land regulations say, and rightly so, that any applicant should be possessed of 5400 at least before he be allotted a farm. This regulation would have cut out some 95 per cent of these applicants. . . . An innate sense of chivalry--and, might I add, a policy of laissez-faire?--caused their applications to be acceptedhand they were one and all granted farms. Even so, it might not have been a serious matter had they been scattered throughout the country, but, alas! they were all granted farms in one block in the newly opened Uasin Gishu Plateau. This plateau forms in some ways the keystone of the whole Protectorate. This is due not so much to its fertility and climate, though both are excellent, but to the fact that it is by far the largest tract of country at present opened which is not subdivided either naturally or artificially. . . . The great bulk of this splendid country was placed in the hands of a crowd of indigent Dutch, with two natural results. First, all development has been practically 38CO 879/111, No. 998, serial no. 154, Governor to Secretary of State, April 10, 1913. 78 at a standstill. . . . The bulk of the inhabitants have supported themselves by the unlicensed slaughter of the once numerous game. The second ill-effect is the formation in our midst of a solid mass of utterly disloyal colonists, speaking their own language and having their own Church and who now have the insolence to demand a Dutch education at Government expense. Next to our Indian friends they form the most difficult problem in the Protectorate. Apart from this one dark spot, the future of white colonization looks bright.39 The review of his book by the EAS emphasized this portion of the text. The reviewer reiterated Cranworth's charge of lack of development on the Plateau but refused to print the second charge, declaring it libellous.40 The Afrikaners were defended by one of their British compatriots from South Africa (and a seller of plots of land 41 Ortlepp to Afrikaners near Eldoret), Mr. A. Ortlepp. feared that Cranworth's book and the review would simply encourage the type of gossip going on in Nairobi about "a harmless little Dutch community inthe Uasin Gishu." He contended that the Afrikaners did have the required amount of capital for the grants of land and that development had not occurred on the Plateau because of the lack of adequate 39 . . Lord Cranworth, A Colon 1n the Maklng or S ort and Profit in British East A r ca (Londo : MacmiIIan and Co., Ltd., I912), pp. 81-83. Cranworth owned land in the Nyeri district. 4OEAS, September 28, 1912, pp. 12-13. 41Ortlepp owned land directly across the Sosiani River from Farm 64 or Eldoret. After giving a lot for the site of the NGK, he expected to sell lots to Afrikaners who did not wish to pay the price or meet the requirements which the government had set for 64. 9"- >— .. .J' (n (3 79 transportation. The British were no better off. As for the killing of game, it was necessary for the advancement of agriculture. He was convinced that the bad qualities of the Boers were the result of living in a demanding environ- ment for so many years. Furthermore, he recalled that Hindlip had said on one occasion that all South Africans were undesirable settlers, "a view which is known to be held by officialdom in this country." He reasoned that South Africans had remained silent, hoping for a reduction of this unfounded prejudice, "based as far as I can ascertain on theories of 'Game Protection' and "Native Rights' faddists." He concluded with a challenge to Cran- worth to bring on his "public school boys" to compete with all South Africans as frontier settlers.42 42§A§, October 12, 1912, p. 9. There were those in the administration who disliked the British South Africans as much as the Afrikaners. One DC's annual report exem- plifies these prejudices: The latent antagonism between Dutch and English, if anything, more pronounced ill feeling between Afri- canders (English South Africans) and English, are probably the most serious [sic]. The former is now and wIII probably become in— creasingly so, the more or less straight forward politi- cal antagonism of 2 distinct races, and though one dis- likes being swindled by a Dutchman as much as by anybody else, one knows what to expect in dealing with them and one's annoyance is to some degree tempered by their plausibility and good humour; the latter, the ill feeling between English Africanders and English is compounded of mutual contempt, accentuated on the English side by the demand of the Africanders for social equality—-a demand which no true born British Snob can admit for a moment. There seems to be no contempt equal to that felt by an Englishman for men of his own race, who have according to his view ”degenerated" and none 80 Cranworth personally responded to Ortlepp's letter. He reiterated his contention that the great majority of the Afrikaners did not have the minimum capital required for grants of land, that few had satisfied development require- ments by the end of 1910, and that those Boers who migrated to the Protectorate were not a fair sampling of the com- munity in South Africa.43 Ortlepp rejoined that it was "most regrettable that the hostility to them [Boers] is not confined to Lord Cranworth and his book, but exists in the minds of most of his fellow settlers, very few of whom have a good word to say for the 'D_____ Dutchmen,‘ who is credited with all kinds of vices, which he does not "44 possess. like that felt by the Colonial for the English "new chum" and his real or suspected airs of superiority. Further English people think that the majority of the lower class Africanders have all the vices of the Dutch without any of their redeeming qualities. KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1912-13. It should be mentioned that though there are no statistics delineating the South African English from those of the homeland, it was commonly accepted that those English on the Plateau were almost exclusively South African. The English faction was small and would be composed of the officials in the area. 43EAS, December 21, 1912, p. 12. 443A3, January 25, 1913, p. 22. Ortlepp said that the AfrikaKEE's greatest virtue was that he was a white man with a white wife, "to whom the blame of being the author of hybrid progeny will never with justice be imputed. For this reason alone I consider him a most desirable settler. . . . He knows the negro character," and treated the negro accordingly. Two weeks after the publication of this letter, there was a short, cryptic rebuttal above the signature "Old Public School Boy" asking Ortlepp if he had forgotten the existence of and the origin of the Cape Boy. EAS, February 8, 1913, p. 23. 81 The second incident occurred in 1916 when settlers were agitating for greater participation in the administra- tion of the Protectorate leading to self-rule.45 In a letter to the LBEA, C. Percy Smuts, an Afrikaner settler on the Uasin Gishu, perceptively observed that settler self- government was impractical and unrealistic. He suggested that the Protectorate should join the Union of South Africa since the Union handled the colored question better than the Colonial administration. Smuts contended that such union would ensure a white voters' roll. The first responder noted the presence of non-whites on the Cape voters' roll and objected to the Union Parlia- ment's refusal to support financially the Imperial forces . 46 in Europe. A second letter signed "Este" was more vitriolically anti-Afrikaner. He stated that South Africa was the only self-governing dependency which has not generously responded to the scheme of settling soldiers on the land after the war. The reason is not far to find. Most of these settlers would be presumably English. And the present government never has, and never will respond to any scheme which would place onze Natie in a minority at the polls. Este agreed that joining the Union would ensure a white voters' roll, 45 1912-13. KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 46LBEA, August 26, 1916, p. 10; LBEA, September 9, 1916, p. 17. 82 but I very much doubt whether any coloured man would gravely get up and object to any measures being taken for locust destruction, "locusts being a plague sent by God and therefore not to be interfered with." Cer- tainly no educated Indian would do so. He believed it ridiculous for the Union government to print public notices "in Dutch as well as English, a language which the majority of the 'Afrikaans? speaking population do not understand!"47 This money was wasted in efforts to bolster an "illiterate patois." As for a South Africanized BEA, Este asked: "Are we to have all English teachers dismissed, say in the Uasin Gishu district, and their places supplied by half-educated and disloyal specimens of 'the older population' hailing from that hotbed of disloyalty Stellenbosch?" Este feared that union with South Africa would increase Afrikaner immigration and consequently the numbers of poor whites. "In this connection I may mention that there are quite a large number of Dutch children growing up on the Uasin Gishu with little more knowledge than how to drive a team of oxen or shoot a buck, accomplishments which any native will shortly be able to do as well or better." Most of all Afrikaner presence in East Africa threatened its English character. "The writer has left South Africa from a con- viction that that part of the world is becoming less and 47Until 1925, Dutch remained the official language of the Afrikaner community in South Africa. Because of the differences between Dutch and the Taal or Afrikaans, some had difficulty reading Dutch. 83 less a place for an Englishman with English ideals to live in--and he would be sorry to find the conditions which he has left follow him to British East."48 The editor of the LB A deplored this kind of racial extremism and hoped "that as the younger generation grow up--despite the intriguing, disloyal predikant and the narrow-minded Englishman--the blending of the two divided halves will assuredly progress to one undivided national whole-~Britishers all." He saw no immediate possibility of 49 joining the Union but did not oppose close economic ties. After publishing one additional letter from a South African Afrikaner soldier in which Este's criticisms were answered carefully and moderately, the editor declared that no more correspondence would be published on this matter "in view of our own desire, and that of the authorities, not to encourage the evil of racialism in this Protectorate. 50 8| Indeed, there was integration of English and Afri- kaner on the Plateau before World War I. In 1910 the Uasin Gishu Farmers' Association was formed with a mixed member- 51 ship. Of the total 78 officers (including board members) 48LBEA, September 30, 1916, p. 20. 49LBEA, September 27, 1916, p. 13. The underline in the quote is the author's. 50LBEA, October 7, 1916, p. 16. SlLBEA, June 18, 1910, p. 5. 84 before the war, 25 were Afrikaner. All presidents and all 52 but the first vice-president were British. The number of Afrikaner office holders was nearly proportionate to the number of Afrikaner landholders in 1911. Afrikaners participated in two Protectorate-wide Associations, the Landholders' Association and the Conven- 53 tion of Associations. The former was composed of small farmers and included six Afrikaner members in 1912. During that year it was admitted into the Convention and soon after lost its independent influence.54 The Convention was the largest and most influential 55 settler association in BEA. At its first general meeting SZLBEA, January 20, 1912, p. 8b; July 20, 1912, p. 14; OctSBE? 12, 1912, p. 6; February 22, 1913, p. 8; May 3, 1913, p. 1; June 14, 1913, p. 20; September 6, 1913, p. 15; May 23, 1914, p. 16a. 53For a discussion of the founding and activities of these two organizations, see Dilley, British Poli , pp. 36-41; Bennett, ”Settlers and Politics," pp. 283-98. 54Of the Convention, Dilley has said: "The Conven- tion has been known as the 'Settlers' Parliament' and as the 'White Parliament,‘ and has exerted an influence far beyond any other unofficial organization. . . . And because of the effectiveness of their organization, they have wielded an influence far beyond that which their consti— tutional position or their numbers would lead one to expect. They have adhered to the policy of agitation accepted by the earliest colonist organization as the only method of accomplishing anything." Dilley, British Policy, p. 41. SSLBEA, June 3, 1911, p. 9; June 17, 1911, p. 3; August 5, I9II, p. 13; August 3, 1912, p. 7; and EAS, May 17, 1913, p. 17. "" 85 in February of 1911, the Uasin Gishu Farmers Association sent four delegates, three Britishers and one Afrikaner, A. F. Arnoldi.56 At its second meeting in mid-year, the Uasin Gishu.was granted two additional delegates, both of whom were Afrikaners, Cloete and van der Merwe. These Afrikaners were silent on such issues as a proposed land bank, elected Legislative Council members, adult suffrage and even the ”Black Peril," but not on the issue of the administration's land policies. Cloete, van der Merwe, and Arnoldi were not concerned about greater liberality in the granting of land (even though many Afrikaners remained landless) but rather with the 99-year lease limitation in the 1902 Crown Lands Ordinance. Cloete and Arnoldi also led the discussion against a proposal to limit the size of individual landholdings. Cloete labelled such action "socialistic."57 The next year there were only two Afrikaners among the delegates. They sponsored two proposals: (1) that the Convention seek administration approval for the use of African squatter labor (laborers who would use portions of land rather than receive wages in exchange for labor), and (2) that the Convention encourage Sunday blue laws. The Convention supported the latter proposal in its mid-year $6LBEA, February 4, 1911, pp. 3-6. There were a total of nineteen delegates at this first Convention. S7LBEA, August 5, 1911, pp. 5-7; EAS, August 5, 1911, pp. 6-10. 86 meeting but it opposed the former.58 Through the Conven- tion, the Uasin Gishu delegates asked for one representative on the Protectorate Education Board. The government approved the request and appointed Cloete to the position.59 His appointment, Afrikaner participation in the Convention and Afrikaner involvement in the Uasin Gishu Farmers' Association might have anticipated complete assimilation of Afrikaners into settler politics. The deaths of Cloete in 1912 and Arnoldi in 1916 and continued ethnic xenophobia prevented such assimilation. The Protectorate government was more remote from the Plateau settlers than from most of the BEA settlers. Administrative officers did join the Afrikaners on the Plateau shortly after their arrival60 but higher officials visited the area infrequently.” The visits of Governors Girouard in 1911 and Belfield in 1913 did not change the distinctive aura of the Uasin Gishu in Nairobi. After Belfield's visit the LBEA commented: In many reSpects, that area of the Protectorate is develOping on lines peculiar to itself. Isolated as it is at present, and populated, in the main, by a 58.9315. AUQUSt, SI 1911: Pp. 6’10. 59LBEA, January 20, 1912, p. 8b. 60 Settlers." KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, Political Record File, "The 87 distinct type of settler, it seems destined to progress by methods that have found favor in the southern regions of Africa. . . .51 Because of their need for services, the settlers' estrangement from Nairobi was detrimental to their economic development. The Plateau residents contended that no development could occur until transportation facilities were improved between their area and the rest of the Pro— tectorate. They wanted a rail line to their district62 but while they waited for it, they pressured the administration to improve their road system. The only road to the Plateau, the Londiani road, was the source of constant discussion and complaint. It was neither properly constructed nor maintained, and could not handle heavy traffic, particularly during the rainy season. Since most of the transport riding was done by Afrikaners, certain points of the road received Afrikaans names: Bakoondraai (baking oven corner), Sweepstok-ggfbgg_(sweeping broom forest), Rooisee (red sea; during the rains this was a morass of red mud), Arnoldi-gs: 252g’(Arnoldi's hill), Suikervlei (sugar swamp: a spot where a load of sugar either turned over or sank into the 63 mud) and others. There were instances in which the 61LBEA, March 8, 1913, p. 12. 62This issue will be discussed in ch. IV since the rail line to the Plateau was completed beyond the chrono— logical scope of this chapter. 63"Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure," p. 21. 88 riders needed six weeks to travel the sixty-four miles from the Londiani station to "Sixty-four" or Eldoret. Already in the 1909-1910 District Annual Report the first DC, Corbett, warned that "the Londiani Road and lack of postal facilities will probably constitute the staple of com- 64 Two years later the road had not been improved. plaints.” The LBEA reporter sarcastically commented that the Public Works Department officials "are lounging about Nairobi with the other government departments; squandering their bloated salaries on bioscope entertainments and, as likely as not, revelling in rickshas and all the other vicious pleasures of city life."65 The settlers complained to Girouard during his visit but received no action.66 In 1912 and early 1913 new sections of the road were built but were so poorly con- structed that travelers used some old sections by prefer- ence.67 A visitor described the new road as so narrow that two wagons could not get by each other comfortably. There were two reasons for such a narrow road; the first is that ground is owned by a nobleman or two, and that these poor chaps cannot afford to give more land for a road. . . . Secondly that it is intended to 64KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1909- lo. 65 LBEA, June 29, 1912, p. 13. 66Letter to the editor, LBEA, October 19, 1912, p. 8. 67LBEA, February 8, 1913, p. 1. 89 keep these fellows [transport riders] from idling and sleeping their time away while travelling over this distance: the trenches being of such proportions that should they blunder into them a clean capsize will be the inevitable result.68 Belfield traversed the road on his tour of the Uasin Gishu and promised prompt action in improving it. In his letter to the Colonial Secretary, he estimated that 58,800 would be needed to make the necessary immediate repairs.69 By June of 1913 no repairs had been made and a crisis occurred when supplies on the Plateau were running low and the ware- houses in Londiani were overflowing. Twenty-six ox-wagons were stuck along the first seven miles of the road. The first automobile also reached the Plateau at this time but not under its own power. "It had to be hauled out of the 'red sea' and other well known mud holes on the road."70 Very little was done to improve the road until after 1918. Other objects of complaint by the settlers included postal services, Veterinary Department quarantines, lack of medical facilities, and strict game laws. The Plateau settlers believed that little consideration was given to local circumstances when Nairobi officials set policy. For example, there was a "rude abundance," as one settler put 68LBEA, March 1, 1913, p. 1. 69LBEA, March 8, 1913, pp. 1—2; EAS, March 6, 1913, p. 5; CO 8797111, No. 998, serial no. 154, Governor to Secretary of State, April 19, 1913. 70LBEA, June 14, 1913, p. 3. 90 it, of zebra on the Plateau which interfered with agricul- ture. Nevertheless, the Plateau settlers were limited to 200 rounds of ammunition annually and a burdensome £3 license for killing game on one's own farm.7l Even the local administrators were aggravated by the directives from Nairobi. One DC sarcastically explained that by "over- centralization" he "meant the fatuous attempt of Departments at Nairobi to manage the affairs of a district situated a great distance away. . . ."72 Thus the estrangement between the Plateau settlers and the rest of the Europeans of the Protectorate was not limited to the Afrikaners but to all of the Plateau settlers. Economic development on the Plateau was slow before 1918. Pastoralism and agriculture were the principle economic endeavors of the settlers, with transport riding assisting many Afrikaner families. The Afrikaners arrived on the Plateau with the intention of raising cattle. Most 71LBEA, March 1, 1913, pp. l-2; CO 879/111, No. 998, serial no. 317, Acting Governor to Secretary of State, September 11, 1913; enclosure from the Game Warden dated January 12, 1912. 72KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1912- 13. This report was found by P. G. Tait, the Uasin Gishu DC in 1961. He copied it and forwarded it to the Provincial Commissioner with this comment: "I came across some old Uasin Gishu Annual Reports the other day and in perusing them thought you would be interested in the attached ex- tract which could almost have been written today." KNA, DC/UG/l/Z, UG District Annual Report, 1961. 91 of the trekkers bought their stock in East Africa and raised their herds from the indigenous breeds.‘73 Only Cloete imported substantial numbers of prize Afrikander cattle into East Africa. Within a few months after their arrival most were lost to rinderpest and East Coast fever.74 The indigenous stock was more resistant to but not free of these diseases. During the mid-1912 Convention of Associations meeting the Uasin Gishu delegates complained of the lack of restrictions on the Somali traders and their disease- 75 During the next year epidemics of carrying cattle. rinderpest and East Coast fever swept across the Plateau and rapid innoculation by the undermanned Veterinary Department was not sufficiently able to prevent substantial losses.76 On September 30, the Chief Veterinary Officer spoke at the Uasin Gishu Farmers' Association meeting and proposed a compulsory dipping program to exterminate the disease-carrying tick. His proposal was accepted by a 100 to 13 vote.77 Dipping gave the farmers a temporary respite 73The Van Rensburg trekkers purchased many of their cattle while they resided in the Nakuru area for nearly two months. See LBEA, August 22, 1908, p. 6. 74£§§éy June 10; 1911; p. 7; and August 5, 1911, 75LBEA, August 10, 1912, pp. 5-7. 76LBEA, August 23, 1913, pp. l7, l9. 77LBEA, October 18, 1913, p. 8. This speech was translated into Dutch at the meeting. 92 from the diseases78 but they recurred again during the war because of the Veterinary Department's inability to curb the activities of the Somali "runners" who were buying in the Nandi district and selling on the Plateau.79 The diseases and the promise of a railroad encouraged the settlers to turn to agriculture. Many completely abandoned stock-raising. The first Afrikaner to follow the von Bredas to the Plateau, J. de Waal, reportedly planted the first wheat in the Protectorate.80 He also experimented with castor and linseed plants.81 By 1911 rustproof wheat, mealies, beans, potatoes, wattle and gum trees had been tried with some success.82 These promising experiments fostered limitless faith in the agricultural potentialities of the district.83 ”The day is soon coming that every farmer and business man 78LBEA, November 1, 1913, p. 4. 79§§§A, June 5, 1915, p. 11. These diseases remain a problem on the Plateau today. My Made It Their Home, presented by the East African Women 3 League, introduce d by Elspeth Huxley (Nairobi: East African Standard Ltd., 1962). 81LBEA, February 24, 1912, p. 12; and April 27, 1912, p. 14. See the Governor's report, CO 879/111, No. 998. Serial no. 154, Governor to Secretary of State, April 10, 1913. 82LBEA, March 18, 1911, p. 12. 83See Belfields' report, CO 879/111, No. 998, serial no. 154, Governor to Secretary of State, April 10, 1913. 93 will want to live here, only give us the railway."84 Bloated by this sense of importance the LBEA reporter complained of a dearth of stamps in the Eldoret post office and warned that it would be well for "officialdom, in all its branches, to awaken to the importance of the plateau."85 However, until the railroad was completed, the Plateau's importance was just a hope of its residents. The sale of land in the Trans-Nzoia District in May of 1913 marked the first expansion of the Plateau settle- ment northwards.86 Six farms were sold to Afrikaners. At the same auction eight farms were sold on the Uasin Gishu, only one to an Afrikaner.87 Many Afrikaners could not buy because they lacked capital. Others were reluctant because of the Belfield administration's antagonism towards Afri- kaner landowners. A letter to the LBEA by P. S. Krieger declared that he and three other Dutch farmers wanted to buy land but were afraid that after they had purchased it 84LBEA, January 5, 1918, p. 13. BSLBEA, September 20, 1913, p. 16. 86LBEA, May 10, 1913, p. 6; and May 24, 1913, p. 10. The auction sold land from all parts of the Highlands. A total of sixty-six farms were sold, fewer than the admin- istration had hoped. Belfield asked the Colonial Office for permission to sell land for six weeks after July 1 at the upset price of l/2R per acre and was given permission to do so. CO 879/111, No. 998, serial no. 173, Governor to Secretary of State, April 28, 1913; and serial no. 177, Secretary of State to Governor, May 27, 1913. 87LBEA, May 24, 1913, p. 10. 94 and made the necessary improvements, the government could not be trusted to evaluate the improvements fairly and perpetuate the ninety-nine year lease. He also hinted that. the government refused to grant leases to some Afrikaners in spite of their high bids in the auction. He concluded: "We hear on every side that the Government is very slim,"88 For whatever reason their inability to monopolize the purchase of newly opened lands on the Uasin Gishu and in the Trans-Nzoia prevented the Afrikaners from establishing a geographically distinct Afrikaner community in the Pro- tectorate. The site for the administrative center for the Plateau was chosen in early 1910. It was centrally located along the Sosiani River on a farm marked "64" on the early survey maps. The farm had been purchased earlier but was returned to the government because of its infertile soil. A few temporary structures were built before 1913 including the post office, DC's house and office, a store and a clerk's house.89 Two British businessmen, Smith and 88LBEA, August 23, 1913, p. 13. Slim is trans- lated as crafty, sly, or cunning. The LBEA editor reluc- tantly admitted to some truth in the charges. 89 1912-13. KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 95 Mundell, built a hotel and bar of wattle and daub.90 The new settlement was called Eldoret, the Masai name of a river a few miles distant.91 In early 1912 the township was surveyed by the government and plots were sold on March 28, 1913. The sale of the plots was conditional, the construction of buildings of unspecified value being required within three years. For this reason only four large firms purchased land; Smith, Mundell & Company, Harris and Redmond, the Standard Bank, and the Sosiani Syndicate.92 The farmer across the river, A. A. Ortlepp, took advantage of the three-year hiatus between the choice of the township site and the sale of plots and the vague development requirements, and plotted 90The Standard Bank of South Africa began its operations on the Plateau in this building. The anonymous author of the history of the Uasin Gishu filed about 1930 in the District Office (and now in the Kenya National Archives), made this humorous comment of the "bank": "An amusing anecdote is told of this safe, how a boy emptying a bucket of water against that particular portion of the wall which supported the safe, washed away the 'daub' with the result that the entire Standard Bank of South Africa Eldoret (the safe) fell out into the veld. It is interesting to note that this wattle and daub Bank room was approved by Head Office at Cape Town 'provided iron bars were put in the windows.'” KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, Political Record File, "European Occupation," pp. 4-5. 91The Eldore River for which the town was named empties into the Sosiani some distance above Eldoret. 92LBEA, April 12, 1913, p. 3. The Sosiani Syndicate was formed with the objective of building a hotel in Eldoret. Stock for this Syndicate was sold on the Plateau earlier. See LBEA, June 1, 1912, p. 11. 96 off part of his farm and held his own auction the day after that of the government. To promote his sale, he gave one plot to the NGK as a site for their church. Ortlepp admitted that he was attempting to sell his plots to a particular section of the Plateau population, the Afri- kaners. He explained that the Boers in South Africa were accustomed to having 2525 in their $2323, or small houses in their villages in which they would stay on weekends when attending religious services, particularly on nagmaal weeks. Since the Government had allocated only fifteen residential plots, he was furnishing others to serve as EEEE for the Boers.93 Understandably the DC called this a "politically regretable departure" since it tended to set up an Afri- kaner counter-township. To avoid this eventuality, the administration agreed to incorporate "Ortleppville" into Eldoret.94 This action and the subsequent building of the NHK structure on the "64" side of the river prevented the establishment of an Afrikaner township. A new spurt of growth began shortly after the auctions and a bridge was built across the Sosiani.95 By August there were three shops open for business.96 Ortlepp 93LBEA, May 17, 1913, p. 9. 94KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1912-13. 95 LBEA, June 21, 1913, p. 13. 96 LBEA, August 30, 1913, p. 1. It should be noted that though—tfie European accounts make few references to 97 opened the first hotel, the Pioneer, in late 1913.97 The Sosiani, or later Eldoret Hotel, was started before the war but was not Opened until 1926.98 By 1916 there were four European shops, and five Indian and Goan shops in Eldoret. Ortleppville had three shops: Ortlepp's hotel, a carpenter shop, and a blacksmith shop. The ethnic composition of the township was as follows (excluding Africans):99 Adults Children Europeans 27 Goans 10 6 Indians _3_l_ __3_ Total 68 64 Thus Eldoret was well-established as the administrative and commercial center of the Plateau. Education was a bone of contention between the Afrikaners and the government throughout the history of the colony. In the fall of 1909, a Professor Fraser from India the fact that there were a number of Asian-owned shops on the Plateau, it would seem that these shop-keepers did a creditable job of keeping the settlers well-supplied. For example, see the LBEA, February 24, 1912, p. 12, in which the reporter comments that the Asians carried more supplies at cheaper prices than the Europeans in Eldoret. 97LBEA, December 6, 1913, p. 10d. 98KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, Political Record File, "European Occupation." p. 6. 99KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1916. 98 was sent to the Plateau by the government to study educational needs and to make recommendations. After a brief visit he suggested that a central school be estab- lished. The Department of Education rejected the recom- mendation on the grounds that it did not have the funds to build a central school and that the Afrikaners, who would have almost exclusive use of it, could not agree on a location for it. The department did offer to pay half of the salaries of teachers in temporary small schools if the 100 and did establish two small parents would pay the rest, schools in early 1910. The subsidies for them were niggardly, however, and the department demanded that English be used exclusively. Further insuring Afrikaner non- attendance was the presence of a few Goan children.101 By the end of 1910 the schools were closed and Arnoldi com- plained at the first Convention of Associations meeting that there was no school for the one hundred school-age children living on the Plateau.102 In May of 1911 the Director of Education, Orr, called a meeting of the resi- dents of the Uasin Gishu to discuss the problem. He insisted that all government schools must use English. The 100Loubser, "Het Werk," pp. 267-68. 101Ibid., p. 267. As one can see from the popu- lation statistics immediately above, this could not have been a significant factor in 1910, since there were only six Goan children in 1916. lozLBEA, February 4, 1911, pp. 4-5. 99 Plateau reporter pessimistically surmised that all English- medium schools would fail: "Settlers hereabouts do not expect that many will attend, as the people in the neighbor- hood are all Dutch and wish their children to be taught in the same language, which is claimed to be but natural."103 In the estimates for 1911, 5500 was allocated for the development of education of the Plateau. Six schools (called Government Farm Schools) were opened between the fall of 1911 and mid-1912 but the total 5500 allocation was not used.104 Obviously these schools were very temporary. Three were closed by 1915 though the farm school "system" persisted until 1939. The language issue was not resolved until the last month of 1911. Official documents do not explain Govern- ment action but apparently Governor Girouard removed Orr's authority to resolve the language issue and permitted the Plateau residents to decide the matter in the forum of the Uasin Gishu Farmers' Association. At their December 9 meeting, C. J. Cloete proposed that Dutch be used in the schools through Standard II after which English would be compulsory. Loubser vehemently opposed this scheme, 103LBEA, May 27, 1911, p. 13. 104CO 879/109, No. 983, serial no. 3, Governor to Secretary of State, November 30, 1911; Estimates for 1912- 13. For the following year the Governor urged that the entry in the Estimates for 1911 for education on the Uasin Gishu be changed to "Contribution to buildings and staff of Provincial Schools." 100 demanding Dutch through all of the standards, and "heated arguments took place between himself and Mr. Cloete." Another Afrikaner, M. Scholtz, suggested that Dutch be carried through Standard IV, followed by a compromise proposal by the Britisher Stephenson that it be used through Standard III. Much of the discussion was led by Afri- kaners, a minority of which sided with Cloete, opting for more English. Loubser led the majority in support of totally Dutch schools. With the help of the English settlers, Cloete's proposal received a majority vote and was adopted by the Education Department as its policy. Not all of the English settlers opposed all-Dutch schools. The English reporter for the LBEA supported the Loubser position: It seems a great pity [not to have all-Dutch schools] as most of the farmers of the Uasin Gishu District would like to have their sons and daughters taught in their own language, and what every one thinks is no more than right [sic]. In the Cape Colony, 0. R. Colony and TranstEI equal rights are given to both languages, and why not here? However the editor of the LBEA strongly disagreed. He liked the ”Afrikander" as a settler but he supported Cloete's position as the only sane position for BEA. The editor praised Cloete for his opposition to attempts "to import into this new and young British colony the ugly bi- lingual conflict of South Africa." The English had come to the Protectorate first, and, furthermore, most educated Boers spoke English, "so it is purely a matter of sentiment and racial exclusiveness.” The South African can perpetuate 101 his tongue at home, "but this is a different matter from agitating at this late state for the equality of Dutch in another British colony other than South Africa."105 But this was only the beginning of the "ugly bi- lingual conflict" in Kenya. It would raise its hoary head many times in colonial Kenya during the next fifty years.106 The champion of the all-Dutch position for the first twenty- five years, Ds. Loubser, initially demanded separate, government supported schools for "his" children. He reasoned: We must not go along with foreign customs, we must not set a price on our sacred language rights, we must . . . not forget the name and the veracity and the great history of our nation, but earnestly promote and protect them. Twenty years from now when most of our fathers and mothers will probably be dead, what will become of our children? It is not enough to leave land and cattle for them. Character is that which we must ensure to them. It is impossible to make our chilfagn great without giving them Christian character. 105LBEA, December 16, 1911, p. 2. 106Though neither ethnic group was prone to see humor in this matter, the LBEA reporter made the comment that the Plateau was apt to Have a tri-lingual rather than a bi-lingual problem. "Not long ago a settler (recently arrived) was heard instructing his boy in the following remarkable language: ”Lete lampe and hang 'im up dar.'" LBEA, June 15, 1912, p. 9. 107"Herdelike Brief van Wyle Ds. M. P. Loubser," Dos-Afrika, Deel I, no. 3, May, 1947, pp. 13-16. 102 A later pastor summed up Loubser's position: "He believed that if you wish to ensure the future of your Church and your 221k, you must begin with education."108 Loubser's position on the use of Dutch in the government schools may have been weakened by the fact that he had opened a private Afrikaans-medium school at Broederstroom (presently called Plateau Station), in August of 1911.109 After failing to win the language issue, he began a second school at Sergoit in the north- eastern section of the Uasin Gishu. Two teachers were hired from South Africa, Pienaar and de Villiers. At Broederstroom Pienaar had more students than he could efficiently teach, over fifty, and "also at the school of de Villiers at Sergoit is there a growing number of students, no thanks to the competition of a government 110 In spite of their growth the financial position school.” of these schools was not secure during these early years. Overtures were made to Belfield in 1913 to support these schools but language remained a stumbling block. Belfield said: "I . . . made it clear to them that as members of a community settled upon British territory, they are not entitled to make differentiation between themselves and 108"Vergenoeg Gemeente Feesbrojure," p. 32. logLBEA, August 5, 1911, p. 8a. 110"Ds. du Plessis in Dos—Afrika," Part II, Vergenoeg, Deel I, no. 4, July, 1946, pp. 10-12. 103 others residing under the same rule, and that no assistance of the nature requested would be given unless it is accepted that the English language shall be the basis of all 111 teaching.” Thus there were two school systems on the Plateau by 1912, one supported by government and one not, but both were predominantly used by Afrikaners.112 In May of 1912 Director Orr promised the residents of the Plateau a ”first rate boarding school" if they could 113 find enough students to attend. The farm schools were attended by day scholars. Most Afrikaners could not afford school boarding fees. During his visit a year later Bel— field unconditionally promised a central school.114 The new Central School was opened in February of 1915 with 27 students. After much settler agitation the Department aPPOinted the first headmaster in June.115 111CO 879/111, No. 998, serial no. 154, Governor to Secretary of State, April 10, 1913. 1”In February of 1913 a local school committee was selected by the UG Farmers' Association for the government schools. Of the six men elected, five were Afrikaners. There can be little doubt that this roughly paralleled the ratio of students in the schools. LBEA, February 22, 1913, p. 8. 113LBEA, June 1, 1912, p. 11. 1“LBEA, March 8, 1913, pp. 1-2; and co 879/111, No. 998, seriaI no. 154, Governor to Secretary of State, April 10, 1913. 115LBEA, September 6, 1913, p. 8: February 6, 1915, P. 1; December 23, 1916, p. 17. Initially the Department refused to appoint an expensive headmaster rather than 104 The Central School grew very rapidly. By December of 1915 there were 31 students, by January of 1916, 41 students, by June of 1916, 50 students, and by December of that year, 48 students plus applications from 12 others. Part of this growth may have come from the closing of three of the six temporary farm schools established earlier.116 Growth was hindered by the lack of boarding space. Some students were being boarded at private homes in Eldoret.117 During 1915 a crisis occurred over the policy decision of Orr to limit the number of standards to be taught in Eldoret. It was his intent to have the advanced grades (above Standard IV) centralized in Nairobi. The local school committee opposed the scheme on the grounds that (1) transportation would be too expensive: (2) the, Londiani road was frequently impassable; and (3) Nairobi did not have enough room for all of the senior students. Nevertheless Orr moved ahead with his plan and in January of 1916 ordered all students at the Central School who were beyond Standard IV and all students who were older than fifteen or younger than eight to be turned out. This was female teachers. To this the LBEA reporter remarked: "If such is the case, why offer £250 per annum to the head teacher in the Uasin Gishu to teach niggers, while the master at the European school received 5200 to teach the children of the white settler." 116J. W. Laurenz, "Duitsch Oost Afrika," Die Kerkbode, Deel VII, no. 15, April 13, 1916, p. 381. 117LBSA, December 23, 1916, p. 17. 105 particularly hard on the Afrikaners because many of the children suffered from a language handicap and had not matriculated from Standard IV by the age of fifteen. A petition from Afrikaner and British residents of the Uasin Gishu notwithstanding, the Department held to this position and fortified it by granting a generous allotment of £2400 to the Nairobi school for 150 students and £375 to Eldoret for 60 students. These extremely unequal allot- ments elicited a charge of "crass incapacity” from the LBEA.118 By 1918 the Department had relented and began plans for the expansion of the Eldoret Central School to include the higher standards. Direct statements of Education Department positions on the private Afrikaner schools during this period were not found. However, according to one of Loubser's letters from South Africa in 1916, the Department was trying to eliminate the schools. This did not surprise him since he recalled the words of Orr as he (Loubser) left East Africa for South Africa in 1912: "If it had been in my power I would have swept away your schools on the Uasin Gishu Plateau." Loubser urged his former parishoners to maintain the schools since the loss of private control of the schools would lessen the interest of the parents in the 118Ibid. The editor commented: "If we can pay Provincial and District Commissioners to look after niggers we can surely provide for the education of our settlers' children!" p. 12. 106 education of their children and, more importantly, the government would not permit the teaching of 2252 £221 23 2352 Godsdienst (our language and our religion) in Govern- ment schools. Should the schools close, all of his work there would have been in vain. He warned that the closing of the schools would mean that "we will maintain one Church there, but it will be powerless and colorless, one in name (with the Church in South Africa) but with no elevated, refined, reasonable, and sacred truth.” In addition, Loubser promised his assistance with the procurement of other teachers, since the terms of Pienaar and de Villiers were nearly ended. If money was needed, he would try to collect some in South Africa.120 Though Sergoit may not have remained open throughout this period, Broederstroom continued as a private school until 1925. World War I presented a difficult dilemma for the Afrikaners in GEA.121 Some harbored strong anti-British 119LBEA, January 5, 1918, p. 13. 12°Unpublished letter dated August 8, 1916, found in the NGK Archives of Pretoria. 121There were about 300 Boers in GEA at the begin- ning of the war, according to the editor of 22 Kerkbode, and 700 in BEA. "Onze Kerk in Cost-Afrika," DeeI XII, no. 10, March 10, 1921, p. 274. The editor also stated that the population of the Meru church went up during the war and that of the Vergenoeg church went down. The only reasonable explanation is that the Meru church grew because 107 sentiments and were anxious to join the German forces under von Lettow-Vorbeck and strike back at their former tor- mentors. Others may have joined for adventure and profit. Two Afrikaners, von Rooyen and Nieuwenhuizen, were frequently very close to von Lettow-Vorbeck and in some instances may have acted as his confidants.122 Nevertheless, the majority of the Afrikaner community in GEA maintained a neutral position throughout the war. Their position was made difficult because of the reconnaissance missions of BEA Boers into GEA. The GEA Boers felt compelled to protect and assist these spies. For this reason many of the Boer families were ordered by the Germans to leave their farms and migrate to Ufiomi further south where they could not pass on information and where they would be relatively safe from attack. Many of the Afrikaners willingly moved since it removed them from the scene of battle. Furthermore, the Germans assisted them and paid them well for stock which was commandeered. Finally some of those who moved south were paid by the German Government to ride transport to the battle fields with supplies for the troops.123 of the presence of troops and that the Vergenoeg church diminished because of the loss of young men to the armed forces. 122See Gen. Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, East African Cam ai ns (New York: Robert Speller & Sons Publishers, Inc., 1957), pp. 101, 116, 158, 178, 181-82, 184. 123One Afrikaner claimed that he had received £600 for services rendered to the Germans during the war. See 108 The pro-German element increased particularly when only they were permitted to ride transport. This caused friction within the Ufiomi camp between the new German citizens and the remaining neutrals who were British subjects. The split also seems to have followed religious division, the Hervormers (NHK) being pro-German and the neutrals coming from the other two churches.124 The neutral Afrikaners had to withstand intense pressure both from the German Government and their pro-German compatriots to maintain their position.125 The Afrikaners in BEA were British subjects at the beginning of the war and were not faced with the dilemma of choosing to support the government under which they were living or the government whose citizenship papers they H. J. C. Pieterse, Baanbrekers in dis Maalstrom: Da boek van Mev. Abel Pienaar (Kaapstad: NasionaIe Pers Beperk, 194277_p. 56n. This edited diary of Mrs. Pienaar is the source of most of this information. Mrs. Pienaar praised the Germans for their fair handling of the Afrikaners and described the difficulty which most of her people had in deciding to remain neutral in the first year of the war. The Beyers-de Wet rebellion in South Africa, the position of the Botha-Smuts Government, their British citizenship, and their great liking for the German settlers were con- flicting factors which caused them to remain neutral. See pp. 35-61. 124Ibid., p. 61. Mrs. Pienaar sarcastically said on July 3, I9I5: "The estrangement between the two Boer sections lessens, so much so that our Hervormer—friends on the other side of the hill now talk of themselves as 'our honourable' Boers, but if they talk of our group, they call it the 'English' Boers." 125Ibid., pp. 90-92. 109 held. Neither were the British Afrikaners forced to leave their homes because the front line was approaching them, yet there were rumours of anti-British sentiments among some of the community. The war was not anticipated in the Protectorate by any of the settlers and little preparation was made for it. On the Plateau a Volunteer Reserve had been established in 1912 but its primary function was to protect the settlers against a "native” rebellion. There were indications that the settlers were dissatisfied with this defense force and there was talk of establishing a Legion of Frontiersmen with increased local control.126 Nothing came of this proposal. The question of a defense force was raised at the mid-year Convention of Associations meeting in 1914 and the two Afrikaner representatives opposed a conscripted defense force, for, as Theunissen said, there were times when a farmer had to be home for his crops. A. F. Arnoldi announced that he was ready to take up arms voluntarily if needed, a promise which he subsequently kept. In spite of Afrikaner opposition, compulsory service was approved by the Convention but it was clearly thinking only of defense against Africans.127 126LBEA, December 14, 1912, p. 4. 127LBEA, July 4, 1914, p. 7. As the LBEA editor later confessed, European affairs seemed distant and remote from East Africa. "Unfortunately as a people we gave little or no thought to the possibility of war with our German neighbours. The officials of Downing Street were 110 In spite of their lack of preparedness, many Afri- kaners volunteered for service within the first few months of the war. With the rank of Captain, Arnoldi led a contingent of ninety Boers to the front in October. This display of loyalty did not alleviate the fears of Protecto- rate leaders of disloyalty among some Boers. Their concern appears to have been justified. Even Arnoldi felt it necessary to send an open letter to the Afrikaner community urging them to be loyal to the British. His stated reason for writing the letter was the rebellion of Col. Maritz in South Africa and his concern that similar anti-British sentiments existed among the East African Afrikaners. In part the letter reads: Now dear friends, it becomes us, firstly, to show our loyalty in word and deed to our King and the present Government; secondly, by such loyalty to sup- port the hands of the Botha Government in South Africa in that we, as Boers, will and shall keep ourselves faithful and loyal to our present Government, and specially to approve of the upholding of Great Britain's prestige. You, my friends, who have before tasted the tyrannical German Government in the past, put in all your energy to enlighten our nation in South Africa, what we will get under such a putrid Government as the German Government. As most of you are aware, I have been resident in this country for ten years, and I must honestly and truly declare that I have always been treated with the greatest consideration, and now the day has arrived for us to show that we are worthy to be subjects of His Majesty King George the Fifth. As you are aware, we have here about 90 Boers at the front, and all and sundry of them approve of what I, as their equally lacking in foresight in not putting the Protectorate into a reasonable state of effective defense." LBEA, November 14, 1914, p. 15. 111 leader, have written, and therefore I pray you all to make known amongst your friends and relations now in South Africa (notwithstanding the great crime of rebellion) what hardships they may expect if the Germans become victors in the bloody, murderous war initiated by them.128 Concern and uncertainty over the loyalty of the Afrikaners is reflected in the comments of the editor on the letter. He noted that Arnoldi "does not mince matters in his opinion of those who would favour 'Kaiser Bill' in prefer- ence to the good old, generous and liberal-dealing Union Jack." And a bit more nervously: "Capt. Arnoldi appeals to his fellow countrymen, and though we think that there is very small fear indeed of such men as Beyers and De Wet having anybody's sympathy here, in British East Africa, yet we are glad to see Mr. Arnoldi come out in the open and declare without equivocation his staunch loyalty to the flag."129 Afrikaner interviewees indicated that there was a small minority who refused to serve in the British forces. In mid-1917 seven Afrikaners were brought to trial for not reporting to duty. In their defense a father and son claimed that they were in the Congo when the war broke out and that they had both "joined up" there. After two years 128This was published in both Dutch and English. LBEA, October 31, 1914, p. 11. 129LBEA, October 31, 1914, p. 11. Arnoldi was killed in battIe a few months after this letter was written. LBEA, January 29, 1915. 112 the two returned to the Protectorate and the son was presented with a notice to report to duty which he ignored. He was sentenced to six months incarceration. Three others received nine and ten month sentences. In spite of two years of active duty another received five months. One was acquitted of all charges.130 No evidence was found of any others who ignored conscription orders, although some transport riders were irritated by the commandeering of their wagons and oxen and refused to carry tranSport free of charge in support of the war cause.131 The majority of Afrikaners were very sensitive to charges of disloyalty. The LBEA received their criticism for entitling a report on the Beyers-De Wet rebellion. "Boer Disloyalty." The editor admitted that it was done "without a thought of the greater majority of real and genuinely loyal Boers." The apology went on to praise the Boers of South Africa for coming to the aid of the Union Jack, and the same in a measure may be said of our fellow settlers here of similar derivation. Men have come all the way from Uasin Gishu and other parts of East Africa to strike a blow for the flag against the Teuton. And these men were of the first to volunteer.132 130LBEA, July 7, 1917, p. 3. 131 KNA, DC/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 132LBEA, January 23, 1915, p. 13. 113 Obviously the EBEA did not wish to antagonize the large number of Afrikaners who supported the British cause.133 For the Afrikaners one of the consequences of the war was the delay of the building of the railroad to Eldoret. They also lost one of their leading spokesmen in Protector- ate affairs, Major A. F. Arnoldi, as a war casualty. Arnoldi had been a delegate to the Convention of Associations for four years. The LBEA noted the significance of his death along with that of Cloete's earlier: "It is noteworthy that the two most prominent and most active and intellectual personages this colony has gained among the Dutch settlers should both now be lost to us--the late Mr. Cloete and now 134 It was not until the World War II Major Arnoldi.” period that another Afrikaner received a position with Protectorate-wide responsibility and acclaim. The loss of these two spokesmen was one of the contributing factors to the withdrawal of the Afrikaners from active involvement in Protectorate affairs in the 19205 and 19303. The end of the war also marked the beginning of soldier-settlement schemes which would alter the composition and attitudes of the settler community and would open up 133Mr. C. J. Roets, an octogenarian who accompanied the Van Rensburgs to BEA, claimed that 5 percent or less supported the German cause. Interviewed August 9, 1969. A few of those Afrikaners interviewed claimed that the anti- British members of the community were usually roikops, since this group lacked the courage to fight. 134LBEA, December 11, 1918, p. 6. 114 new areas of land for settlement. The first effect tended to lessen the influence of the Afrikaners and the latter permitted the community to expand into new areas of the Protectorate, particularly around the Aberdares. Though some immigration of Afrikaners from South Africa occurred in the 19203, the predictions in 1916 of a British MP, Commander Wedgwood, that 20 percent of the South African regiments serving under General Brits and Van Deventer would remain in East Africa as settlers were certainly in- accurate.135 The settlement in new areas of the Protector- ate by Afrikaners was due primarily to natural population growth on the Plateau itself and to the migration of some of the settlers from what had by then become a British- ruled Tanganyika. A smaller number came from South Africa. The Plateau was virtually unoccupied by Africans before Europeans began hunting and settling in the area. The anonymous author of the short history of the Plateau 135Commander Wedgwood, M. P., D. S. 0., "Land Settlement in East Africa," The Contem ora Review, September, 1916, pp. 315-24. Wedgwood IooEed favorably on this predicted settlement of Boers in the Protectorate, though his reasons seem somewhat limited and superficial. He said: ”It would be impossible to get better material for colonists than these men who understand oxen." He contended that the poor could ride transport and would be very useful in the developing of the Laikipia district which was scheduled for opening soon. Oxen were necessary in opening this new district and "only the Dutch and the Cape boys are born understanding oxen," pp. 321-22. 115 found in the Kenya National Archives, indicated that the Plateau was used for hunting by the surrounding tribes, 136 particularly the Nandi. Thus conflict between Africans and settlers was avoided during the early years of settle- ment because of the non—essential use of the Plateau by the Africans. The earliest recorded incidence of violence was the murder of one of the von Breda brothers in the fall of 1911. This account was given by an employee of von Breda: I worked for Mr. W. T. von Breda and I got six days leave, I went to my reserve. On my return I did not find the Bwana, and evidence in the house shewed that he had left hurriedly and had been away some time. I searched around and found blood marks, and eventually discovered his body about 150 yards away from the house near the garden. The body was already putrid. He had evidently been trying to mount a slope leading up to his house after having been struck, and died in the attempt. I later learned that Arap Chemorua and Arap Saiwa were the culprits. The latter had gone to the Bwana's house and told him to come with him to extract some honey from a tree. Bwana Breda followed, and not far from the house Arap Chemorua was in hiding, and as the Bwana passed, speared him. I do not know why they did it, as this Bwana was a friend of the Elgeyo, he fre- quently shot game for them. They stole nothing from his house or stock after killing him.137 The two men fled to the Marakwet, the tribe which lived to the north of the Elgeyo. The settlers eventually prevailed upon the administration to send the King's African Rifles to find the two men.138 136KNA, DC/UG/Z/lr Political Record File, "Natives." 137lbid. 138LBEA, September 30, 1911, pp. 2, 8; October 28, 1911, p. 13. In March of 1911 the LBEA reported that the 116 Though contact with Africans was limited in con- trast to other settlement areas, the Europeans and adminis- trators experienced a sense of insecurity. In early 1914 the DC asked for more police for the district. He noted that he had 1,500 square miles to patrol with 230 occupied farms with stock, "surrounded by natives whose national sport seems to be theft from white people."139 Acquiring labor was one of the first concerns of the settlers. As was true in many areas of Africa with white settlers, the Africans saw little value in working for these intruders. The Marakwet were asked to pay taxes first in 1910 by the visiting Acting DC from Baringo, but continuous administrative control was not established until after the KAR visited the area to apprehend the murderers of von Breda. The first DC for that district acknowledged that the Marakwet would not work for the settlers unless the hut tax was strictly enforced.140 The Elgeyo remained KAR had apprehended the two murderers but the anonymous author of the short history of the Uasin Gishu indicated that only one of the culprits was caught at this time. The actual thrower of the spear, Arap Chemorua, was not caught until many years later. LBEA, March 30, 1912; and KNA, DC/UG/2/l, Political Record File, "Natives." It is possible that another man was erroneously arrested in 1912. 139KNA, Dc/UG/l/l, UG District Annual Report, 1913. 140KNA, DC/UG/ELGM/l/l, Elgeyo Marakwet District Annual Report, 1912-13. fre W81 in mi In 117 free of administrative control for a few more years and were not a reliable source of labor.141 During 1912-13 a commission was sent to BEA to investigate the labor situation. The Chief Native Com- missioner, John Ainsworth, alleged that brutal treatment, animal conditions, and floggings by both settlers and some officials were the principle reasons for the shortage of labor.142 Most settlers, both Afrikaner and British, agreed with the points which Delamere made to the commis- sion. He (1) favored the establishment of locations out- side the reserves where Africans desiring employment could go; (2) advocated the use of an identification rather than a pass card for Africans; (3) rejected the payment of higher wages; (4) demanded the retention of the highlands for whites only; (5) requested more cooperation from the administrative officers for the acquisition of labor; (6) was ambivalent on the size of the hut tax; and (7) implored that no labor be imported (presumably Asian).143 The one point not made by Delamere and most Britishers but which the three Afrikaner witnesses supported was the use of squatters or resident laborers. One of the major complaints on the Uasin Gishu was the desertion of laborers before 141KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, Political Record File, "Natives." 142LBEA, January 25, 1913, p. 4. 143LBEA, January 11, 1913, p. 3. 118 their contracts had expired. Squatters would be less capable of movement since they would have their families and cattle with them. In contrast to the British settlers, the Afrikaners strongly supported this type of labor. Their claim that desertion was a serious problem was upheld by their DC. His solution, however, was to suggest that flogging would be a good deterrent. Police Inspector Richardson maintained that ill treatment was the major cause 144 Africans, on the other hand; assever- for desertions. ated that the Afrikaners or Kaburu, as the Africans called them, were notorious for not paying their laborers after their contracts had been fulfilled. If an African laborer was bold enough to ask for his just wage, he would be flogged with a hippo-hide whip and forced off the farm 145 without his wages. This practice was obviously not conducive to the retention of laborers for the full con- tract terms. Though the labor shortage was not immediately 146 removed by this commission's report, the administrative 144LBEA, January 25, 1913, p. 19. 145Interviews with David Mbuku, June 12, 1969; Chip Arap Korir, June 10, 1969. Mbuku claimed that all Afri- kaners practiced this whereas all of the British were humane. It was commonly accepted among Africans from various parts of Kenya, even those rather distantly removed from the Afrikaner areas of settlement, that the Kaburu were hard persons to work for. This point was raised in casual conversation with many Africans. 146See letter to the Editor and editorial comment, LBEA, October 11, 1913, p. 5. 119 officers were more cooperative in acquiring labor for the settlers after 1912. During World War I no complaints were filed of a labor shortage. After the war the more reliable squatter laborers were customary on the Plateau. The eight year period immediately preceding and including World War I saw the Afrikaners fulfilling many of their early objectives. Many families had their own farms. All three denominations had established gemeentes or congregations and most children were attending one of the three types of schools on the Plateau. Negatively, the administrative officers were not very sympathetic to the Afrikaners, no railroad served their settlement, and the government opposed the use of Afrikaans in its schools. The Afrikaners had also developed a reputation for i11- treatment of labor, making it more difficult for them to hire than the British. Not until the very end of the colonial period would the Afrikaners experience as much influence and acceptance among their fellow settlers and the administration as they had in this early period. Before World War I Afrikaners enjoyed representation in such organizations as the Land Board and the Convention of Associations as well as in local Plateau organizations. The path was opened for Afrikaners to be integrated into the British settler community. On the other hand, there were those in both 120 communities who opposed or resisted such integration. deaths of Cloete and Arnoldi irreparably weakened the of the integrationists and permitted the followers of Loubser and his separationist ideals to prevail among Afrikaners. The forces the CHAPTER IV NADIR: POVERTY CONTINUED AND INFLUENCE DECLINED, 1918-40 During the inter-war period the Afrikaners' main concerns were economic. Most of the community were poor as the period began and many became destitute. Not until the last few years of this period did their circumstances improve. The Uasin Gishu was the area of the small farmers or the "district of the small man," as the LBEA called it.1 Profits from the export of agricultural products were slim, making intensive agriculture very difficult. There was little chance of improvement until better transportation facilities were completed to Mombasa for the export market or to Nairobi, the only major local market. The extension of the railway to the Uasin Gishu attracted the attention of officials and unofficials alike after World War I. One railway official pointed to the economic need: 1LBEA, November 26, 1921, p. 16. 121 122 The early construction of the line is a matter of the greatest importance to the development of this large EurOpean settlement. . . . The cost of transport by road is prohibitive to competition with other parts of the country more favourably situated as regards railway communications. In 1920 a Nairobi businessman affirmed the economic need for the railroad since "the prosperity of Eldoret depends, as it has always done, on the question of transport facilities." He also referred to the stigma which the area had acquired because of its isolation. "Until the proposal to build the railway focused public attention upon the Plateau and reassured the general public as to the impor- tance of the area, Trans-Nzoia and Uasin Gishu were more or less correctly regarded as the uncivilized virgin backblocks of Kenya." But circumstances had changed. A new type of settler, the soldier-settler, had moved into the Trans- Nzoia. "I was impressed by the type of settler we have there--a cultured colony of ex-soldiers and others who have put their money in the land and are energetically developing 3 These new settlers had on scientific and business lines." changed the image of the region and, as M. F. Hill has suggested in his history of the Uganda Railway, their 2Cited in M. P. Hill, Permanent Way: The Sto of the Ken a and U anda Railwa (Nairobi: East African EaiI: ways anH HarEours, 1961), p. 369. 3LBEA, November 6, 1920, p. 23. 123 presence made the completion of the line a matter of urgency.4 Proposals to build a spur of the railway north- eastward from Nakuru had been suggested as early as 1905. The lumbering firm of Lingham and Grogan (E. W. Grogan) offered to build a spur to their lumbering area, Timboroa, and on to the Uasin Gishu in exchange for grants of land on the Plateau. Agreement was not reached with the Colonial Office and the matter was dropped in 1906.5 In 1913 two new, separate initiatives came from Grogan and the Uasin Gishu settlers. Grogan directed his initiative to the 6 The Colonial Office through a Member of Parliament. Plateau residents signed a petition asking for the railway and pledged to underwrite the project with a one penny per 4Permanent Way, p. 410. 5There is much correspondence between this company and the Colonial Office during this two-year period. CO 879/87, NO. 772, serial no. 149, Mr. C. S. Goldman to the Colonial Office, August 12, 1905; CO 879/97, No. 772, serial no. 192, Goldman to Colonial Office, September 30, 1905; for the Colonial Office's counter-offer, see CO 879/92, No. 844, serial no. 156, Colonial Office to Goldman, May 8, 1906; and two succeeding offers by Messrs. Lingham and Grogan, CO 879/92, No. 844, serial nos. 430 and 471, Lingham and Grogan to Colonial Office, November 2, 1906 and November 30, 1906. Rejection of the latter offer by the Colonial Office caused negotiations to cease. Generally the two parties were poles apart on this matter and eventual agreement appeared impossible almost from the start. 6co 879/111, No. 998, serial no. 264, Mr. George Lloyd to Colonial Office, August 28, 1913. 124 acre levy to cover early losses.7 These initiatives prompted the Colonial Office to begin work on the project but progress was slow because of its indecision over which route should be extended to Uganda, the Kisumu-Mumias- Uganda route or the Nakuru-E1doret-Mumias-Uganda route. The latter was longer and more costly to build but offered far better gradients than the Nakuru-Kisumu line. A survey was made of the Nakuru-Eldoret-Mumias route in 1914 but the final choice of this route was not made until after the war. Until then the Uasin Gishu remained unserved.8 As the war approached its conclusion, the Plateau settlers were prepared to build their own trolley line to 7LBEA, August 2, 1913, p. 16; Egg, September 6, 1913, p. 9. It should be noted that not all residents of the Plateau supported this pledge, nor the building of the railroad spur itself. The correspondent from the Uasin Gishu to the LBEA feared that the pledgers would regret their signatures. Pointing to the uneconomic operation of many spurs in South Africa, he predicted continuous losses on the spur. LBEA, November 1, 1913, pp. 4-5. The trans- port riders, nearIy all of whom were Afrikaners, outrightly opposed the building of the railway. It is not possible to determine how many of the Afrikaans-speaking settlers were involved. However, there was probably more division among the Afrikaner settlers on this issue than there was among the British settlers. LBEA, November 15, 1913, p. 9. 8There are numerous entries on this topic in CO 879/111 and 879/115. For the approval of the survey see CO 879/115, No. 1016, serial no. 60, Secretary of State to Governor, February 27, 1914. Another factor to be consid- ered in this decision was that the Mumias route would service the industrious Africans of Kavirondo while the Eldoret route would serve the white settlers. Also see Ross, Kenya from Within, p. 246; and Hill, Permanent Way, p. 361. 125 alleviate their transportation crisis. Ninety settlers pledged B300 per year for the first three years to guarantee its success. They went so far as to have discussions with a construction company which promised them the same con- struction costs as it had promised the government.9 A Uasin Gishu Railway Committee was formed to pursue the matter. The next month Major Grogan again declared his support for a trolley from Uasin Gishu to the main line.10 Concomitantly the settlers of Nakuru and Naivasha held a meeting in Nakuru and declared their support for a Nakuru- 11 In response to these Eldoret Spur rather than a trolley. pressures, the government announced in late 1918 that it intended to build the main trunk line to Uganda through the Plateau. Though this decision had been made, construction of the line waited another two years because of controversy over the point from which the spur would diverge from the older line. Ultimately the much longer and more expensive Nakuru route was chosen over the shorter Mau route.12 9LBEA, September 14, 1918, p. 26 and September 21, 1918, p. 23. 10LBEA, October 5, 1918, p. 18. 11Ibid., p. 23. The trolley would have been lighter weight and Iess efficient. 121m a lengthy discourse on this choice of routes, Ross presented a good case in support of his claim that this route was chosen against the best interests of the colony and the settlers. The additional cost of the 43 126 Although the Uasin Gishu Railway Committee continued to function during this controversy and supported the Nakuru route, the Plateau settlers showed little interest in the controversy.13 In fact the affirmative decision on the line and its eventual completion to Eldoret in 1925 removed this as the overriding political issue among the Plateau settlers. They turned full attention to their own personal economic situations. Some of the early trekkers came to East Africa with the intention of engaging in pastoralism or mixed farming. Disease brought on disillusionment with animal husbandry shortly after World War I. In 1918 rinderpest plagued the Plateau and a year later pleuro-pneumonia swept the area. To stop the diseases the Veterinary Department destroyed all infected stock without compensation to the owners.14 The heavy losses incurred by these diseases and the accompanying slaughter thoroughly discouraged stock-raising. miles of track from Nakuru to the point where the two proposed routes would converge was excessive and those funds could be used to build spurs to other settled areas. The difference in cost was approximately £600,000. Ross contended that pressure from Delamere, through whose land the Nakuru route would pass, prompted this impecunious decision. Ross, Kenya from Within, pp. 238-55. 13LBEA, December 20, 1919, p. 16 and December 27, 1919, p. 10. 14LBEA, November 9, 1918, p. 12, and November 3, 1919, p. 115—. ' 127 Between the two world wars most Afrikaners counted income in bags of grain rather than heads of cattle.15 For a short time it appeared that flax and coffee were destined to become major crops.16 It was predicted that coffee would make wealthy men of the Plateau and Trans-Nzoia land-owners but the prediction proved chimeri- cal. Coffee grew but did not thrive in the Plateau's climate. Flax was grown for a couple of seasons and commanded high prices in the world market. The Plateau farmers built thirty-two mills for processing the grain and were prepared to export two hundred tons per year. Many farmers had invested heavily in machinery for this crop.17 But the world demand for flax was over in late 1921 and their investments were lost. By 1923 the crop faded into 18 obscurity as an income provider. In spite of these 15Interviews with C. J. Roets, August 9, 1969; H. C. De Wet, August 9, 1969; and P. L. Malan, August 9, 1969. By 1937 the Legislative Council's Settlement Committee Report referred to the lack of mixed farming in the colony as one of the reasons for its inability to contain more settlers and pointed to the Uasin Gishu as the area in which mixed farming was practiced the least. African squatters were permitted to graze their cattle on the farms thus preventing the pastoral side of mixed farming from being engaged in by the settlers. The Africans' cattle were the primary disease-carriers. CO, East African Series, Pamphlets, "Settlement Committee Report," 1937. lGLBEA, October 9, 1920, p. 34. 17LBEA, May 20, 1922, p. 5. 18KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Agricu1ture. One report stated that the price had 128 conditions, the Director of Agriculture continued to encourage these farmers to grow the two crops because the two alternatives, maize and swine, could not be marketed for lack of transportation.19 Attesting to their low incomes, few farmers attended a meeting with their Member of Legislative Council 20 Most had in which an impending income tax was discussed. borrowed heavily to maintain their farms. In a neighboring African district, a handing-over report in 1923 gave this advice to the incoming DC regarding the hiring out of labor: "As practically all of the settlers on the Plateau are in the hands of the bank, you will be well advised to require certified cheques or cash in payment of registration expenses."21 No rapid modification of this economic malaise occurred in the 19203, even after the completion of the railroad to Eldoret. The more glamorous crops were dropped fallen from £600 to £80 per ton. G. J. Van Zijl, "Oos- Afrika," De Kerkbode, Deel XIII, no. 28, July 12, 1922, pp. 904-037 19One report indicated that many farmers would fail in 1922 unless they were able to sell their current maize crop. LBEA, February 11, 1922, Supplement. 202225, March 26: 1921, p. 14. Hereafter Member of Legislative Council will be referred to as MLC. 21KNA, DC/ELGM/Z/l, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Handing-Over Report, July 28, 1923. 129 by the farmers of the region and the more stable but less remunerative crops of wheat and maize became standard.22 Furthermore the completion of the railway was a mixed blessing for the Afrikaners. Although the railroad assisted in the marketing of crops for those with land and machinery to grow them, income supplementing transport riding became obsolete for those who did not. Another income supplement had been the hunting of game. As late as 1924-25 one Afrikaner candidly admitted that his family had lived on game after their arrival on 23 the Plateau. In the mid-19203 large numbers of zebra had become a menace to the settlers' crops and the government supported their systematic removal and permitted hides to be sold. Zebra were shot by both government and individual parties and had disappeared by 1926.24 The dependence of 22KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, us District Political Record File-~Agriculture. 23Interview with J. E. Kruger, June 16, 1969. Ironically, this prosperous farmer and Kenyan citizen hired game guards to protect game on his wheat farm from poor African poachers in 1969. 24KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, us District Political Record File--Game. This account did not indicate that the Afri- kaners were primarily responsible for the extermination of the zebras but it did attribute the near extermination of the giraffes to the Boer transport riders who liked their hides for long ox-whips. Undoubtedly not all of the game was shot out of need either for meat or for crop protection by such intrepid hunters as the Afrikaners. A colony-wide black list of game offenders in 1926 listed sixteen Afri- kaners out of a total of forty-nine. The official community believed that the "Dutch" were by character offenders of game laws, as this comment by the Elgeyo-Marakwet DC about 130 Afrikaners on hunting was more explicitly reported in a new area of Afrikaner settlement, Laikipia. In his 1924 annual report the DC disapprovingly noted that the "Dutch" supple- mented their income by selling buffalo hides, and called it "a lucrative business."25 Nevertheless in 1927 the DC reported: Zebra are still too numerous. Zebra skins are now a marketable commodity, and the animals are being slaughtered in large numbers by Dutch farmers and their Dutch squatters. A great deal of money is being made out of the sale of the hides. This market for zebra hide has been an undisguised blessing to the Dutch who, as far as the majority of their community in this district is concerned, have little else to live on. The next year the DC reported that most of the zebra were gone, due primarily to the "Dutch who carried it on for 27 profit." The same situation existed in Nanyuki until 1929, when a number of families left the district. The a fine indicates: "Mr. de Jager and his fellow Dutchmen have had a lesson which has probably cost considerably in lawyers' fees and inconvenience. . . ." KNA, DC/ELGM/4/l, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Confidential Correspondence. No other reference could be found to this case. The lesson, presumably a stiff fine, was not learned by all the Afri- kaners however for the following year the DC for this same district reported: "The Kerio Valley is the haunt of elephant (two species), buffalo and rhino and as shooting of all these was a sound commercial proposition a most undesirable type of 'sportsman,' usually Dutch, was attracted thereto.” KNA, DC/ELGM/l/l, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Annual Report, 1927. 25KNA/DC/LKA/l/l, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1924. 26Ibid., 1927. 27KNA, DC/LKA/l/lS, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1928. 131 teacher of their school reported that "most of the Dutch at Nanyuki earned their livelihood by the sale of zebra skins, but the Game Department has recently prohibited the shooting of these animals, so that the Dutchman has lost his means of subsistence."28 As a group, the Afrikaners were worse off, and in many instances poverty stricken, in contrast to their fellow British settlers. The pre-war trekkers had come with no more than minimal capital requirements and their isolated position on the Plateau prevented the accumulation of capital. The post-war trekkers, most of whom.were ”poor whites" in South Africa, came with even less capital in spite of the higher costs of land.29 The same was true of those who came from Tanganyika during this period.30 The few years between the completion of the railroad to Eldoret and the onset of the world depression were not long enough 28 Nanyuki. KNA, Education/Deposit 1/527, European School, 29Already in 1922 the Land Office in Nairobi had set 52000 as the minimum capital requirement and suggested at least £4000 to £5000 for incoming settlers. CO, East African Series, Pamphlets, Colony and Protectorate of Kenya, "Land and Land Conditions in the Colony and Pro- tectorate of Kenya” (Nairobi: Land Department, 1922). The same figure of 52000 was given in 1937 by the colony‘s Settlement Committee Report as the sum needed over and above the purchase of the land. CO, East African Series, Pamphlets, "Settlement Committee Report," 1937. 30The parents and family of Jack Boshof arrived in Kenya in 1928 from Tanganyika with few possessions. Inter— view with J. Boshof, June 2, 1969. 132 to permit escape from poverty. For these reasons many of the Afrikaners were "poor whites" in Kenya.31 The Afrikaners' response to this condition was three-fold: (l) migration occurred to new areas; (2) new occupations were pursued; and (3) pressure was put on the Government for better educational opportunities.32 Most of the trekking to new areas occurred within East Africa. However at least ten families trekked farther inland to the Belgian Congo, two migrating as far as the French Congo.33 There is no evidence of trekking to other areas of Africa such as the Sudan or northern French Equatorial Africa. 31The DC of Laikipia warned the Government in 1935 of the "poor white" problem. He urged the improvement of their inadequate education and emphasized the potential cost of this problem to the government. KNA, DC/LKA/l/16, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1935. All of the Afri- kaners interviewed confirmed this evaluation of their economic condition during the inter-war period. Two sources, Mrs. S. Snyman, a teacher in Rumuruti in 1928 (confirmed by educational file, KNA, Education/Deposit 1/86), and Mr. Desmond Connor, one time Assistant Superin- tendent of Police in Eldoret, spoke of many cases of nudity among school-age children in Laikipia and Uasin Gishu respectively. Mrs. Snyman said that she had to find clothes for some of the children before they could attend school. Interviewed June 18, 1969 and June 11, 1969 respectively. 32Because of their importance the last two responses will be discussed separately in ch. V. 33Aucamp, "Die Trek," "Die Geskiedenis van die Familie Hans Du Toit": Marie Abel, "Suid—Afrikaans Pioniers van Belgiese Kongo," Egg Afrika, Deel II, no. 4, September, 1949, pp. 7-9, and Part 2, Deel II, no. 5, December, 1949, pp. 15-17 and 52. Also see reports by Ds. A. L. Aucamp published serially in Die Kerkblad, May 2, 1934, pp. 62-63; June 6, 133 Many of the Tanganyikan Afrikaners trekked after the war. They found it difficult to renew their herds and grain harvests were difficult to market.34 The men who had joined the German cause were "repatriated" to Germany, causing further hardship for their families.35 Before 1927 four families migrated a few hundred miles southward to the Iringa area where they had been temporarily "resettled" by the German regime during the war.36. After three clerical visits during the next ten years, the group disappeared. Possibly they joined others from the Meru community who rushed south to the new Lupa gold fields in the mid-19305.37 1934, pp. 120-21; June 20, 1934, pp. 140-41; December 18, 1935, pp. 420-21: January 15, 1936, pp. 442-43: February 5, 1936, pp. 465-66: and February 19, 1936, pp. 496-97. 3922 Kerkbode, Deel XII, no. 10, March 10, 1921, p. 279. 35See reports of visiting clergymen in 23 Hervormer, July 15, 1922, p. 10 and April 15, 1923, p. 7. An NGK clergyman, H. C. de Wet confirmed that four families in Mwanga were husbandless because of this exportation of German supporters. "De Kerk," 23 Kerkbode, Deel XI, no. 16, April 15, 1920, p. 561. Another Visiting clergyman, A. Oosthuizen, attributed the poverty of the Tanganyikan Afrikaners in some degree to the absence of many men of the community after World War I in Germany. Letter, Die Hervormer, February 28, 1927, pp. 230-32, and "Chg—Gemeentes in Cos-Afrika," Part II, March 23, 1927, pp. 310-12. 36Also see Pieterse, Baanbrekers, pp. 58-88. The first report of these Iringa settlers was found in Die Kerkbode, Deel XX, no. 24, December 14, 1927, p. 713. 37Die Kerkbode, Deel XXXVIII, no. 23, December 2, 1936, p. 807? and 23 Hervormer, April 1, 1930, pp. 223-24. The NGK predikant also visited families in Dodoma. A. L. Aucamp reported many Afrikaners in the Lupa goldfields. Letter, Big Kerkblad, October 7, 1936, p. 21. 134 But most of the Tanganyikans trudged northwards into Kenya.38 It is improbable that economic conditions in Kenya were significantly better than in Tanganyika but the substantially larger area of temperate highlands offered better prospects for their future. Furthermore those who had previously refused to live under British rule and continued to harbor anti-British sentiments saw little distinction between living under direct British colonial rule in Kenya or mandated British rule in Tanganyika. There was also a small but continuous flow of immigrants from South Africa into Kenya during the inter- war period. Reliable statistics are not available since immigration and census statistics do not distinguish between Afrikaners and Britishers. Most Afrikaners entered Kenya as British subjects. The membership roll of the largest congregation, the Vergenoeg Gemeente, showed 221 membership transfers from South Africa during the 19203 and 19303. If the inter-war immigrants divided their loyalties among the three churches in prOportion to those already in Kenya, the total number of immigrants would have been 38Interviews with J. Boshof, June 21, 1969: Jozua Joubert, June 25, 1969: P. L. Malan, August 9, 1969: and H. C. de Wet, August 9, 1969, confirm this migration. Boshof's family migrated to the Uasin Gishu in 1928. The others named many compatriots in Laikipia and Nyeri who came from Tanganyika. 135 approximately 300, an influential but not overpowering minority.39 As this period began, Afrikaners lived in six areas in Kenya; the Uasin Gishu Plateau, the Trans-Nzoia, Nakuru, a few around Nairobi and Thika, and a few in the Nyeri District around Nanyuki. With the inhabitation of the Uasin Gishu even before 1914, maturing children and land- coveting immigrants had to look to other areas of the colony for open land. Some had already gone to the Trans- Nzoia District before the war and others followed after. Most of the expanding community turned to the newly-opened districts north and west of the Aberdare Mountains. As was true of parts of the Trans-Nzoia, this area had been selected for the soldier-settlement scheme.40 The scheme allocated 1,246 farms to veterans in these two districts but only 545 were actually occupied.41 Much of the land, 39Vergenoeg Gemeente Membership Roll, found in the home of J. E. Kruger, Sergoit. The membership rolls of the other two congregations of this period were not found. The completeness of the membership roll from which this figure was taken is not certain. Furthermore some residents in Kenya may not have transferred their memberships from South Africa immediately after their arrival. Some early migrants may have waited until this period to do so. Therefore the figure given can only be taken as a close approximation. The 1930 proportions of NGK to GK and NHK member- ships was three to one. See Appendix B. 40See ch. III, p. 114, n. 135. 41Ross, Ken a From Within, p. 85. Ross has pointed out that the beneficiaries of the scheme were the estab- lished landowners of Kenya who had the good land and could sell it at a profit to those settlers who retained some 136 particularly in the Rumuruti district, was unsuitable for intensive agriculture and many soldier-settlers abandoned their estates soon after their first glimpse of them. Though no South African Afrikaner soldiers partici- pated in this scheme, many Afrikaner settlers did follow the soldiers into Rumuruti. Some Afrikaners had settled near Nanyuki east of that district before the war and may have encouraged movement in an easterly direction from the Uasin Gishu.42 A number also migrated here from Tanganyika. While the resident Masai were yet being moved from the district, the DC reported that eighteen farms had been occupied by Europeans, five of which were not given to veterans. According to one early Afrikaner resident, at least three of these non-veterans were Afrikaners, two from Tanganyika.43 Additional Tanganyikans settled in the capital after the soldier-settlement scheme fiasco. Dela- mere had spent 560,000 for all of his land at the beginning of the century and had sold portions of it for £212,043 by 1926, yet he remained the largest land-holder in the colony. 42The Nyeri District Annual Report of 1915-16 listed 134 European residents. Among the British there were 24 men, 11 women, and 5 children: among the Italian missionaries there were 25 men and 28 women: 1 Swedish man; and among the Afrikaners or "Dutch" there were 8 men, 8 women, and 29 children. In contrast to the other nation- alities, the Afrikaners went to the frontier districts as families, as was their custom in South Africa. This same report listed the occupations of the men: 6 officials, 3 merchants, 14 farmers, 26 missionaries, l surveyor, and curiously enough, 8 transport riders. It is probable that all 8 Afrikaners were transport riders. KNA, DC/NYI/l/Z, Nyeri District Annual Report, 1915-16. 43KNA, DC/LKA/l/l, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1920-21. According to this report, many potential settlers, 137 Nanyuki or Rumuruti districts between 1921 and 1925, with Plateau residents following in 1925 and 1926.44 District reports from Laikipia in the late 19205 (not including Nanyuki or Northern Nyeri District) show the growing importance of the Afrikaners in the district. Until 1924 no specific mention was made of this faction of the settler community. The DC reported in 1923 that "Laikipia is occupied mainly by Soldier-Settlers who have had to face very difficult times which have as yet scarcely «4S begun to improve. The next year he noted the need of the "Dutch" to sell hides and "that the opening up of presumably soldier-settlers, had visited the area and were dissatisfied with the stony soil and the dry climate. Jozua Joubert, whose father and family moved to Laikipia in 1921, indicated that the two other Afrikaner families in the area before them, the Luies and the Van Zyls, were bOth from Tanganyika. Interviewed June 25, 1969. 44KNA, DC/LKA/l/l, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1920-21; and interview with Martinus Johannes Christoffel Fourie, June 13, 1969. Other families from Tanganyika were the Van Dyks, the Mullers, and the Vander Westhuizens. Among those from the Plateau were the de Wets, Malans, and Drys. A report of a visit by the Moderator of the Cape Synod of the NGK confirms the presence of these families in these areas and adds a few names. In Nyeri, Ben and Ernst van Biljon, and Barnard; in Nanyuki, Andries Bosman, Jan van der Westhuizen and Theunis de Bruijn; and in Laikipia, Daan, Albert and K005 Luies (former two may have been sons of Koos), Jan Joubert, and Piet van Dyk. Ds. M. P. Loubser, "Die Moderator in Cos-Afrika," Die Kerkbode, Deel XV, no. 48, December 2, 1925. This list—does not claim to be com- plete for NGK members and certainly not for non-NGK members. A report of a visit by an NHK clergyman in 1923 indicated that many members of that denomination had scattered over the colony and could not be visited. A few had probably migrated to Laikipia. Letter from H. P. Wolmarans, 23 Hervormer, March 15, 1923, p. 13. 45KNA, DC/LKA/l/l, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1923. 138 Laikipia as an alienated area has up to date been an economic failure."46 In 1925 the DC was concerned that the Afrikaners were not joining the two farmers' associations in the district.47 One of the reasons may have been that many of these newcomers did not own land but rather lived as squatters or bywoners on the few Afrikaner-owned farms.48 Nevertheless the DC's concern reflected their growing numerical importance. Population statistics for all Europeans in Laikipia as given in DC annual reports are as follows: Men Women Children Total 1922 98 46 22 166 1926 114 58 44 216 1928 120 70 61 251 1929 139 79 72 290 1932 165 90 112 367 Only the 1928 and 1929 reports distinguished between South African Dutch and British inhabitants of the district. In 1928 slightly more than one-fourth of the men and women were Afrikaners (32 men and 19 women), and over half of the children (33), or one-third of the total EurOpean popu- lation. Emigration from the district during the depression caused a decrease in 1929; 20 men, 12 women, and 27 children.49 In 1930 the decrease continued, causing the 461bid., 1924. 47Ibid.. 1925- 48Ibid., 1927. 49Ibid., 1922; KNA, DC/LKA/l/l3, Laikipia District Annual Reports, 1926, 1928: KNA, DC/LKA/l/lS, Laikipia 139 small farm school used exclusively by the Afrikaners to be closed.50 Population growth occurred again a few years later when better land was made available. The Rumuruti area had proved incapable of supporting large numbers of settlers. A much more fertile and higher rainfall area south of Thomson's Falls was Opened up for settlement in the 19303 when the East African Syndicate relinquished control of it.51 Very quickly Afrikaners converged on the area. In 1935 the Kenya Colony Official Gazette Supplement listed fifty-four male and thirty-nine female Afrikaner registrants in the Aberdares electoral district (including Rumuruti and the area south of Thomson's Falls), and immigration con- tinued into this area after 1935. A few individual families migrated to other European areas of the colony but this number was insignificant. District Annual Reports, 1929, 1932. It is difficult to corroborate these figures. The Kenya Colony Official Gazette Supplement of 1928 listed the names of 25 Afri- kaners subject to jury duty in Laikipia out of a total of 97 names. 50M. P. Loubser, "Die Gemeente Vergenoeg, Kenya- Kolonie, Cos-Afrika," originally printed in pig Kerkbode, March 31, 1929. Reprinted in egg-Africa, Deel II, no. 1, April, 1948, pp. 28-33. Also see KNA, DC/LKA/l/llS, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1930. Four of these families were joined by more families from the Nanyuki region in a trek to Northern Rhodesia. KNA, Education/ Deposit 1/527, EurOpean School, Nanyuki. 51See Ross, Ken a From Within, p. 73; Mungeam, British Rule, p. 113. A so Robert Remole discusses the acquisition of this land by the East African Syndicate in "White Settlers or the Foundation of European Agricultural Settlement in Kenya" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1959), pp. 151-57. 140 The Afrikaners' second response to this impoverished condition was to change occupations. British prejudice and the Afrikaners' lower educational achievement limited the range of this response. In the early 19303 the Opening of the gold fields near Kakamega in western Kenya drew many Afrikaners. Gold had been found in this area by missionaries as early as 1904 but was not mined systematically until Mr. Louis A. Johnson began panning in 1928. He formed the Eldoret Mining Syndicate in 1931 and began large scale mining. Other mining companies moved in shortly thereafter but the area remained open to small scale mining by individuals for the next few years.52 One interviewee estimated that about 15 percent of the male Afrikaner population joined the rush to these gold fields. Though most found this an illusory escape from poverty a few did very well.53 Another inter- viewee stated that he had acquired sufficient capital in the fields to permit him to buy a farm and equipment in the Thomson's Falls area.54 However, the 1935 voters roll listed only two Afrikaner miners in the Nyanza District.55 52CO, East African Series, Pamphlets, "Advance, Kenya," The Minin World and Engineering Record, August 5, 1933, pp. 153-59. 53Interview with C. J. Roets, August 9, 1969. 54Interview with Nicholas van Deventer, June 24, 1969. 55Kenya Colony Official Gazette Supplement, 1935. 141 These gold fields did not make a significant impact on the Afrikaner community. Other occupations of the non-farmer Afrikaners were: four railroad workers (Nairobi and Uasin Gishu), two farm overseers (Nyanza and Trans-Nzoia), two farm assistants (Rift Valley and Uasing Gishu), two transport riders (Ukamba), one road foreman (Rift Valley), three mechanics (Aberdares and Uasin Gishu), one garage prOprietor (Aberdares), two salesmen (Uasin Gishu), three teachers (Uasin Gishu), one dressmaker (Uasin Gishu), one clergyman (Uasin Gishu), and twenty with unknown occupations.56 Thus the Afrikaners were only marginally integrated into the non-agricultural labor pool of the colony. In the mid-19303 the economic conditions of the colony, and of the farmer-settlers in particular, began to improve. There were three causes for these improvements: (1) the establishment of the Land and Agricultural Bank of Kenya in 1931, which could grant large loans to farmers for extended periods;57 (2) higher prices for agricultural products, especially wheat, on the world market; and (3) the opening of the fertile area south of Thomson's Falls for settlement by small farmers. The Afrikaners benefitted 56Ibid. 57See S. Thornton, "The Land and Agricultural Bank of Kenya," East African Review, September, 1931, pp. 16-19 for an account of the founding of the bank. According to Thornton, the bank was directed to help the small farmer. 142 directly from all of these historical occurrences and by the end of this period few remained in an impoverished state. The Afrikaners did not become more actively involved in settler politics as one of their responses to poverty. Rather the inter-war period was marked by political apathy. A prime example of this occurred with the first elections to the Legislative Council in 1920. Earlier a committee of the appointed Legislative Council had established electoral districts which were to parallel interest groups among the settlers. The Uasin Gishu was given two dele- gates, theoretically one for each ethnic group.58 In the election, the supposedly Afrikaner district (Plateau South) was contested by a Britisher and an Afrikaner and the former won the election.59 It is improbable that this election signified a breakdown of ethnic xenophobia in this district or in the colony. It had been the colonial administration's intent to bring the right Afrikaners into the political processes of the colony as early as 1911 with Cloete's appointment to the Land Board. In 1918 the first Afrikaner was 58Bennett, Kenya, pp. 37-40. 59KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Legislative Council. 143 appointed to the Legislative Council, P. L. Uys. But the prospect of an elected Afrikaner who would be responsible to his constituents was abhorrent to the British settlers. They complained "that the Committee had gerrymandered the Uasin Gishu constituencies to the advantage of the Dutch."60 Obviously many British settlers resented any Afrikaner influence on colony-wide affairs. But the 1920 election showed that their fears were unwarranted. The Afrikaners had lost interest in colony political matters. They even discontinued sending any of their nationality to the Con-l vention of Associations after 1919 and supported efforts to disband it.61 Similarly Afrikaners withdrew from ethnically mixed organizations on the Plateau. The primary political forum before the war, the Uasin Gishu Farmers' Association, deteriorated to a very small group by late 1919 and dis- 62 appeared for two years. It was resurrected in 1921 with two branches, an "English Section” and a "South African Section."63 This "South African Section" became a separate organization called the Uasin Gishu South African Farmers' Association, or the ”Dutch branch” as the LBEA called it. This ”branch" did send a representative to the December GOLBEA, November 23, 1918, p. 20. 61LBEA, February 14, 1920, p. 5. 62LBEA, December 6, 1919, p. 6. 63LBEA, November 5, 1921, p. 19. 144 Convention of Associations meeting in 1921, but not one of their own nationality. Rather they sent T. J. O'Shea, an Irishman whose affinity to the Afrikaners rested on his strong Irish Nationalist and anti-British sentiments.64 The Afrikaners had no one among themselves who could represent them in colony affairs. In the early 19203 two local political units served as advisory agencies for the District Commissioner, the District Committee and the Municipal Committee. No lists of their members are available but after their revision into the District Council and the Municipal Board in 1929, the Municipal Board had no Afrikaners, either elected or nominated, and the District Council had only three of 65 twelve members who were Afrikaners. Their participation 54Ibid.; and December 10, 1921, p. 26; KNA, DC/UG/ 2/1, UG District Political Record File--Legislative Council. O'Shea was elected to the Legislative Council from the Plateau South in 1924 and served until he left the colony in 1930. In a letter to the LBEA on April 11, O'Shea called for support for the Irish cause by raising the slogan, "Ireland for the Irish." An initialled response to his letter came from the Uasin Gishu and warned of the impli- cations of O'Shea's slogan: "In his letter to you of the 11th instant Mr. O'Shea returns to his attempt to start an Irish Sinn Fein propaganda in this country. With all our troubles of our own that we are passing through, surely it is just a little too much to expect us to get excited about Irish recriminations. 'Ireland for the Irish,‘ says Mr. O'Shea; and, presumably, Africa for the Africans. What is Mr. O'Shea doing here?" Apparently O'Shea did not carry his political philosophy to such a logical conclusion. LBEA, April 23, 1921, p. 12. 65KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Government in Uasin Gishu. The District Council's primary responsibilities at this time were to build and maintain local roads, an activity at which the Afrikaners 145 in local affairs in other parts of the colony was also limited. In the Trans-Nzoia where their numbers were comparatively small, two Afrikaners (of twenty-two) were members of the District Committee and the Road Board in 1921.66 In Laikipia a concerted effort was made beginning in 1926 to persuade the Afrikaners to join the farmers' associations in the district. The DC reported: "To my mind the Dutch community's interests are not sufficiently represented owing to the difficulty some of their members experience in understanding and speaking English." He recommended that the associations be permitted to suggest names for advisory committees but that one seat should be reserved for a DC-nominated Dutchman.67 The following year a new association called the Colonial Farmers' Association was formed and was exclusively Afrikaans. The DC unhappily reported that the association has served no useful purpose. Certain members have now taken the association in hand with a view to its management on constitutional lines. This is all to the good. An association which can adequately represent the Dutch point of view is an acquisition. had the reputation of excelling. This may explain the rather high proportion of Afrikaners on this council in contrast to other agencies on the Plateau. 66LBEA, December 31, 1921, Supplement. 67KNA, DC/LKA/l/13, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1926. 146 Nevertheless he hoped that it would amalgamate with the larger Laikipia Farmers' Association. During the year he did nominate one Afrikaner to the District Committee and later gave their Association three seats (out of eleven unofficial seats).68 The following year the Colonial Farmers' Association disbanded when it was discovered that its secretary, W. S. Van der Walt, had absconded to South 69 Africa with the organization's funds. The organization again appeared in 1937 under the rubric of the New Colonial Farmers' Association. The administrative officer of the Laikipia District at that time did not look upon the revival of this organization with the same approval as was true in 1927. He said: Its aims are to get grants of land from Government for the young Colonists growing up in Kenya. It claims to extend to the Uasin Gishu but it appears to be almost confined to Laikipia. I think there has been a split in the party caused by a too Dutch element wanting all proceedings to be in Afrikans [sic]. Its activities should be watched to see it does not become subverted into a Pro-Dutch Propaganda Society.70 This change in attitude by the administrative officers may have been a quirk of the different personalities of the DC's but probably more influential were the new circum- stances which existed in Laikipia in 1937. The new influx 68KNA, DC/LKA/l/l, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1927. 69KNA, DC/LKA/1/13, Laikipia District Annual Report, 1928. 7°KNA, DC/LKA/3/l, Laikipia District Handing-Over Report, 1937. 147 of Afrikaners threatened to become a powerful separatist faction within that district. After the railway issue subsided, the Plateau Afri- kaners were aroused by only two political issues, the currency crisis of 1920-21 and the Asian question. Their participation in the complicated political meanderings on the first issue was indirect.71 The Plateau South MLC, Mr. A. C. Hoey, had blundered badly in trying to lead the elected members of the Council on this delicate issue. In March he was compelled to apologize publicly for his in- competent leadership and he resigned shortly after.72 The following election sent E. W. Grogan to the Legislative Council from the Plateau South.73 The political crisis over the rights of Asians in Kenya Colony has been thoroughly discussed in other sources and need not be gone into here.74 This issue did not leave 71For a competent discussion of this crisis, see Ross, Ken a From Within, pp. 199-216. The wildly fluctu- ating va ue of the rupee, Kenya's currency, was responsible for the crisis. 72LBEA, March 26, 1921, p. 14. 73KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Legislative Council. Grogan left the colony in early 1923 and was replaced by a provisional member. His con- tinued absence twelve months later forced an election at which time O'Shea was elected. 74J. S. Mangat, A Histor of the Asians in East Africa (Oxford: Clarendan Press;,-I969T especially pp. 115-27: L. W. Hollingsworth, The Asians pf East Africa (London: Macmillan & Co. LthTT 1965, especially pp. 76- 108: Ross, Ken a From Within, pp. 297-430; and Bennett, Kenya, pp. 41-52. Ross's account is the most detailed and gives much information on the attempted coup d; etat in 1923 by some settlers. 148 the EurOpean Plateau residents passive. In an article entitled ”The Plateau Solid,” the §§§A_reported on two meetings on the Plateau. The meeting in Eldoret on September 2, 1921, had 135 residents in attendance to hear members of the executive of the Convention of Associations speak. Thirteen names of settlers present were listed of which two were Afrikaans, Ds. M. P. Loubser and Mr. Engel- brecht. The speakers placed the local Asian discontent in an international setting, claiming that the Kenyan Asians were merely the vanguards in Africa for the expansionist goals of Gandhi and his cohorts. The meeting was ended by a request from a Commander Cokes ”that the White community might speak with one voice, and, if necessary, act as one.” The speakers also asked the Dutch present to ask Smuts, the Prime Minister of South Africa, for assistance. Loubser translated the request into Afrikaans and received unanimous support for a telegram to that effect. The following day at a similar meeting at Soy a request for funds for a ”campaign" made it very clear to all that the settlers were considering rebellion if the Asian question went against them.75 There is no other record of involve- ment by Afrikaners in the conspiratorially planned 223p d'etat of 1923. More than likely distrust of the Nairobi- based leaders of the anti-government group overcame their distrust of the colonial government on the Asian issue. 75LBEA, September 10, 1921, p. 10. 149 Etheridge, the editor of the small Uasin Gishu Weekly Advertiser, commented in mid-1923: Reuters learns from a trustworthy source that opinion is hardening that the solution of the Kenya difficulties will be found in a reversion to some form of Crown Colony Government. . . . This is the wisest solution we have yet seen on the Kenya situation. Representative Government granted to this colony has been a complete failure owing to the fact that the white population is far too small, that it offers no choice of representa- tive men. The same names must be constantly flouted in the face of the electorate, who have no choice but to refrain from voting or to vote for men who do not carry their confidence. By reverting to Crown Colony Govern- ment confidence will be restored to the Indians and Natives and incidentally to a goodly number of Euro- peans. There was much distrust of settler leadership on the Plateau. Reason for this distrust and fear of British settlers on the part of the Afrikaners can be seen in an exchange of letters to the editor of the EAS in 1927. In an effort to remove the pejorative assignations which sur- rounded the term "Dutchman" in the colony, one who called himself ”Ultra-South" stated that the Dutch were a proud 76Cited in Ross, Kenya From Within, p. 382. Taken from Uasin Gishu Weekly Advertiser, July 28, 1923. Mrs. Desmond Cleeve Connor, daughter of Mr. John H. Etheridge, said her father had founded the Uasin Gishu Weekl Adver- tiser in 1916, changed its name to the UaSin Gishu Herald for a short time, and continued publishing it throughout the colonial period. It was still being published in 1969 as the Uasin Gishu Weekly Advertiser, an advertising publication for the local businessmen. It had changed ownership and was then operated by Asians. Mrs. Connor indicated that her father also ran it almost exclusively as an advertiser but on occasion made comments as the one noted above. Interviewed June 11, 1969. The LBEA discontinued publication in mid-1922 and was purchased By the EAS. The EAS did not maintain a correspondent on the Plateau as—the LBEA had done and regular published news of Plateau local events was not printed thereafter. 150 people and need not have a stigma attached to their name. The writer pointed to their Eighty-Years War, the Huguenots' struggle in France (many migrated to South Africa in the late seventeenth century and melded into the Dutch pOpu- lation already there), the Boers' heroic struggle in the Anglo-Boer War, and the Boers' maintenance of racial purity as manifestations of a proud people. He called those who came to Kenya "unrefined illiterates" but he deplored the shabby treatment which they received from some officials. ”They are the victims of undeserved and unjust aspersions. All whites must stand together."77 The following week another letter signed "South African Scot" praised the former letter and declared that the "Dutch" had one charac- teristic which was shared with the English: they never knew when they were beaten. He asserted that the ill-feeling towards the "Dutch" was caused by ignorance on the part of the English.78 The Afrikaners regularly employed Africans on their farms during this period. In the early 19203 most of their laborers were Elgeyo from the eastern edge of the Plateau and some Marakwet north of the Elgeyo. 77SAS, June 18, 1927, p. 56. 78EAS, June 25, 1927, p. 17. 151 In 1919 a serious border incident occurred between the Elgeyo and the nearby European farmers. A fairly well organized and successful cattle raid was staged by the Elgeyo. The reasons for the raid are not clear. The anonymous historian of the Uasin Gishu thought a famine of 1918-19 and the district DC's continued pressure for the hut tax to be the major causes for the raid. The govern- ment also stopped these tribesmen from trespassing on the farms bordering their reserve to graze cattle (particularly the Afrikaner J. de Waal's farm).79 The Elgeyo's "tres- passing" on these farms was legitimized in their eyes because, as one of their DC's put it: "They were driven from the Escarpment [eastern Plateau] by enemies called the Kiptiori from the North East and before they could again emerge from the Escarpment back to their old grounds they found the land confiscated by EurOpean estates and con- cessions."80 One elderly Elgeyo interviewee who had been working for Europeans by the end of World War I stated that the cause for the raid was the bad treatment which members of his tribe received when they hired out to Afrikaner transport riders on the Londiani road. He insisted that a number of Elgeyo never returned from these trips and that 79KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Africans. 80KNA, DC/ELGM/Z/l, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Handing-Over Report, 1921. 152 81 In addition to those this was the immediate cause. factors it is possible that the border farmers had tres- passed on the Elgeyo reserve before the raid. In 1922 the Elgeyo's DC noted that with some border farmers "cattle running and poaching are not looked on as moral crimes."82 The same would probably have been true three years earlier. The raid occurred on February 16 and over 500 head of cattle and 600 sheep and goats were stolen. Five Elgeyo were killed by settlers as the latter defended their stock. Six days after the raid the police staged a counter raid, seized 551 head of cattle and 1,100 sheep and goats. The King's African Rifles followed a few days later and burned eight Elgeyo homes.83 These retaliatory raids had a salutary effect for there is no record of similar raids after this incident. The need for labor was frequently acute on the Uasin Gishu. The early annual reports of the Elgeyo- Marakwet district devoted much attention to the progress of encouraging both the Elgeyo and the Marakwet to hire themselves out to the farmers of the area. A five rupee hut tax encouraged the two tribes to leave their homes for 81Interview with Kipto, June 12, 1969. Unfortun- ately no other clear-minded Elgeyo of Mr. Kipto's age was found who could verify this contention. 82KNA, DC/ELGM/Z/l, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Handing-Over Report, 1921. 83KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Africans. 153 employment on the farms before 1922. In 1920 their DC reported that 700 to 800 of a total of 15,853 Elgeyo had gone off to the Plateau to work and over 600 Marakwet.84 When the construction of the railway began members of both tribes preferred working for these contractors rather than farmers.85 The consequent shortage of labor on the Uasin Gishu caused farmers to turn increasingly to more stable squatter labor. This trend was facilitated by the switch from mixed farming to agriculture after 1918. Without much stock of their own the settlers did not fear the spread of disease by the squatter stock. By 1926 there were 840 Elgeyo squatters on European farms, most on the Uasin Gishu. The immediate effect was to relieve the over- grazing in the 412 square mile Elgeyo reserve. However, the relief was only short term as the DC remarked: The outlook for the future is however very bleak. . . . Practically no farmer can accommodate a herd of 50 cattle or more belonging to one resident native and so when the native's herd gets too big the farmer does not renew his contract but sends the native back to the Reserve with all the cattle he has accumulated. The farmer can easily get another native with but 10 head of cattle. The problem will become acute in under 5 years time. 84KNA, DC/ELGM/l/l, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Annual l‘lF—‘port, 1919-20. There was a sub-station under an Assistant DC? for a number of years in the 19203 in Marakwet. Separate reports were filed from this station on some years. 85Ibid., 1922, and Marakwet, 1923. The latter Feanrt indicated that a number of these workers died of 1nfluenza that year. 86Ibid., 1926. 154 In 1927 there were 1,000 Elgeyo squatters with 20,000 head of cattle and in 1929 there were 1,000 squatters who held one-third of the total cattle population of the Elgeyo on European farms.87 In addition to the Elgeyo the larger Nandi tribe southwest of the Plateau began occupying squatter positions during the 19203. By 1930 some Nandi were replacing Elgeyo on the eastern side of the Plateau. In 1931 the DC of Elgeyo-Marakwet reported that many Elgeyo squatters were returning to the reserve with large numbers of cattle 88 As a consequence, the Elgeyo because of a job shortage. nearly staged a war on the Nandi for squatting on Elgeyo "farms.” The confrontation was only avoided after the Chief Native Commissioner visited Tambach, arrested the instigators among the Elgeyo and threatened severe reprisals for those who persisted with these plans. These tribal tensions engendered insecurity among the local settlers.89 Though the Kaburu continued to treat their labor harshly during this period, they were more generous than the British settlers in permitting large squatter herds to 87KNA, DC/ELGM/l/Z, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Annual Reports, 1927 and 1929. 88Ibid., 1931. 89KNA, PC/RVP6A/l/15/4, Moiben Settlers Association, 1937; KNA, DC/ELGM/l/Z, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Annual Report, 1932: and KNA, DC/ELGM/3/2, Elgeyo-Marakwet District Political Record File. 155 graze on their farms.90 This practice may have prevented many complaints of harsh treatment or non-payment of wages from being filed against the Afrikaners.91 Both the Nandi and the Elgeyo desperately needed grazing land beyond their reserve boundaries. Other African ethnic groups also had labor repre- sentatives on the Plateau. Much of the casual labor came from the Abaluyia, the Jiluo, and the Wagishu from Uganda.92 Since few of these were squatters, Afrikaners did not deal with them. The inter-war period was marked by poverty among the Afrikaners in Kenya. The completion of the Uganda Railway to Eldoret in 1925 did not substantially alter their status. The Afrikaners responded to this condition by: (l) migrating to newly opened settlement areas within and outside the colony; (2) trying new occupations (with little success): and (3) emphasizing better educational 90Interviews with David Mbuku, June 11, 1969; Kipto, June 12, 1969; Samson Jinga, June 16, 1969; Francis Kimauy Kurreie, June 16, 1969: and Kimayu Bundatech, June 16, 1969. 91Only one recorded case of non-payment of wages by Afrikaners was found during this period. These charges were made against two Afrikaner road contractors where no squatter herds were involved. KNA, DC/ELGM/l/Z, Elgeyo- Marakwet District Annual Report, 1928. 92KNA, DC/UG/2/l, UG District Political Record File--Africans. 156 Opportunities. Politically the community had no leaders who were acceptable in the broader colonial community, leaving them with very limited political power. CHAPTER V AFRIKANER FRONTIER: STRUGGLE TO RETAIN CULTURAL INTEGRITY, 1918-40 Before World War I a few Afrikaners were prepared to compromise their ethnic identity in order to become respected members of the entire settler community. With the deaths of Cloete and Arnoldi, these Afrikaners lost their most effective leaders. Thereafter throughout the entire inter-war period community leadership devolved on clergymen from South Africa, especially Ds. M. P. Loubser. These clergymen viewed the community as an extension Of Afrikanerdom from South Africa and resisted all efforts towards its assimilation into the broader settler com- munity. Loubser was the most vocal of these clergymen. His position was representative of this group and became the dominant approach of the Afrikaners towards the British of Kenya until World War 11.1 Loubser considered all outside influence to be detrimental to the whole Afrikaner community. In an lLoubser published a number of articles in 23 Kerkbode. This account of his views is dependent on those articles. 157 158 article in 1922 entitled "Afkeer Of Afweer" (horror Of or defense against), he said: "The relationship of South Africa to the great outside world makes it difficult for her to hold onto all the good things and virtues which she loves, to remain free from the abundant evils which at the same time are being deposited on her clean soil against her will and desire.” He acknowledged that South Africa could not practically isolate herself. Indians could be prevented from migrating to South Africa but not Bolsheviks, Atheists, non-Sabbath Observers, etc. He decried the readily available, frivolous and sometimes scurrilous publications from England, such as T§g_WOrld's N335, Lloyd's News, Daily Mirror, The Socialist Smart Set, and others. He contended that these were concerned with the baser aspects of human nature and distracted young peOple from reading their Bibles. It was impossible for the Church and Christian parents to isolate the youth fom these influences because of their omnipresence but prOper training would teach them to defend themselves against such evils.2 For Loubser the small East African Afrikaner community was a microcosm of all Afrikanerdom. In a pamphlet Of essays published in the early 19203, Loubser set fourth his thcmghts regarding the place of the Afrikaners in East ‘Africa. First he defended the East African trekkers 2M. P. Loubser, "Afkeer of Afweer," pg Kerkbode, Deel XIII, no. 20, July 19, 1922, pp. 940-43. __— 159 against criticisms in South Africa for their decision to leave the Vaderland. Loubser argued for a much broader view of Vaderland. What means the exclamation: "Africa for the Afri- kaners?" I think it means that Africa is for us and we are for Africa. It does not mean "South Africa for the South Africans." . . . In the depths of my heart I feel that South Africa is for me and I for South Africa but this feeling becomes stronger and more inspiring in me if I can say: "Africa is for me and I for Africa. . . .” It Strikes me that a man cannot love his Father- land by bits and pieces. You must have the whole thing. Not South Africa, but Africa. From top to bottom, from Cairo to Table Mountain must the old Wasteland, must the Old mammoth lay heavy on my heart. . . . Africa is our birthright [or heritage]: the trekkers in the North behave just as nature has shgwn them. They take what has been bequeathed to them. Regarding the recent European "invasion" he said: Africa is our Fatherland, we have the first claim, and I would be nothing but a weak fatherlander if a Euro- pean must beat me in the area of love and interest for Africa. . . . Africa is the land of the future and our expatriates are gradually securing that future. If we see how foreign nations expand over the sea to become masters over Africa, then do not grudge our own trekkers all the success which they can have to obtain mastery for ourselves. Rather than criticize, Loubser glorified them: They are still the forerunners of civilization, they are the vanguard for those who follow, they Open new paths for business and trade. . . . Later our children will pluck the sweet fruit of the labour and persistence of the pioneers; later our childrgn will also trek when the wild interior has been tamed. In his Opinion, the East African trekkers were very mucfln in the tradition of the earlier trekkers. They were _._1 3Onse Uitgewekene (Kaapstad: Die Nasionale Pers Beperk, 1923). PP. 28-3f 4Ibid., pp. 14-15. 5Ibid., p. 5. 160 evidences of God's wish that the Afrikaners' should rule Africa. "If it were not so that our nation possessed the power to expand in the Bibical sense, then would we already have been doomed to bow our necks under the yoke of foreign n6 domination. He encouraged those who extolled the virtues of the long dead trekkers on national holidays to end their speeches by saying, People, there are just such trekker people today as your feelings compel you to honor and respect the memories of past heros and heroines now. Here is an Open door for your sentiments and aspirations: look to the North and do not let your inspiration stop with that which is past: turn your face to the sun and permit your expression of your sacred sentiments which you now feel to be directed towards our contemporary trekkers who go to new areas and same the desolate regions there above in our Fatherland. For Loubser trekking was an essential element for the preservation of Afrikanerdom: Each Trek is a newborn child Of our people [volk], a new testimony of our power to expand, a joyous symbol of a new life. . . . If we stop and suppress the Treks, then we run the danger of shutting off the capacity of our people to produce, but since the Creator has placed so much power to expand in us, it can happen, if we wish to keep the people all in a pile, that pres- ently something will burst there, for what is in your blood must come out. As was true of the early trekkers, so his contempo- rary trekkers needed the church to follow and support them 1J1 their predestined task. For that matter the future eXpansionism of the church was directly related to the expansion Of the volk. -__._ 6Ibid., p. 38. 7Ibid., p. 41. 8Ibid., p. 39. will _-._, . y_—-—w« 161 Because our people have the power to expand, therefore shall our Church have power to spread. If our Church must spread, it must do so through the medium Of our people, not through the medium Of the heathen; the more Holland Afrikaners will accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, the more heathens will find the way of salvation. . . . He [the Lord] determined that our Church must play an important role in His Kingdom and He has united the power of our people to expand with the power of our Church to spread; the two powers together, the one just as important as the other. Since the future Of the Church and Afrikanerdom were united Loubser exhorted the Mother Church to maintain ties with the trekkers and to care for their religious orthodoxy for he [the trekker] runs the danger Of losing his feeling for his nation [volk]. . . . There is danger that an estrangement process is going on between the people in South Africa and the people of the interior. For that the Church must keep its eye trained. It cannot be expected that our Voortrekkers concern themselves with maintaining their nationality and with embracing their nation's culture. . . . They have a larger and more sacre task before them. Their first duty is to live. After the wilderness had been conquered, the expatriates could turn to the affairs of their nation. But during the interim the South and the North must not become disconnected, and the best connection is the warm brotherly hand which is stretched from the South and which is grate- fully grasped and shaken by those up there. It is the mission of our clergy up there to keep alive this connection, to pull the bands of unity more tightly, to maintain nifional awareness and to halt the estrange- ment process. Thus Loubser saw his mission and that of the Church as one in which the expatriates would be constantly reminded of 9Ibid., p. 38. 10Ibid., p. 7. 11Ibid., p. 8. 162 their past and of their unity with their brothers of the South. The Church through its clergy was the institution which would preserve the bonds of unity but the means was through education. Loubser urged South Africans to help the trekkers by contributing funds for the proper education Of the trekker children.12 Just as Loubser would have preferred that South Africa, or more particularly, the Afrikaner community, should be isolated from the rest of the world, so he would have preferred that the East African Afrikaners should remain unaffected by their surroundings and would remain true to their volkstradisies. In each case Loubser manifested his absolute confidence in the meritorious and self-sufficient nature Of Afrikaner culture. But Loubser and the trekkers found themselves in the anomalous position of being in a British-administered and British-dominated territory but not wishing to become British. They desired to have all of the benefits which other Europeans of the territory had without losing their own uniqueness, their <3wn culture. TO a remarkable degree the Afrikaners were able to accomplish both goals. 12Ibid. 163 Permanent structures for the three Dutch Reformed churches were built during this period: Vergenoeg NGK in 1921, Rensburgrus NHK in 1922, and rebuilt in 1933, and Eldoret GK in 1930. All were built in and around Eldoret. A second structure was built by the Vergenoeg Gemeente for its members further south and east at Nakuru in 1931. NO new congregation was ever formed in this building and it remained part of the Vergenoeg Gemeente until independence. From the end of World War I, Vergenoeg was served almost continuously by clergymen. Rensburgrus received many visiting clergymen before 1936, with their first permanent pastor arriving that year. From 1940 to 1948 it was again vacant, after which it was served continuously until 1962. The GK received its first permanent clergyman in 1933, but was vacant again from 1937 to 1949.13 This was sufficient clerical support to prevent defections to non-Dutch Reformed churches in the colony. Animosities between the three churches, rather common in South Africa, were not forgotten in East Africa. Though Loubser was never accused of pursuing narrow sectarian interests, another clergyman who served Vergenoeg, G. J. van Zijl, was accused by a visiting NHK clergyman, L. E. Brandt, in 1922 Of trying to eliminate the NHK on the Plateau. Brandt reported that he was the first NHK 13See Appendix A for partial list of serving pastors. 164 clergyman to visit Kenya in eight years. During that interval many had left to join the NGK but were prepared to return now that the home church had reaffirmed their interest and support of Rensburgrus by sending him to visit. This is confirmed by the membership list of Vergenoeg which showed nearly a dozen members leaving that congregation to join Rensburgrus in 1921 and 1922. Whether this loss of membership prompted van Zijl to call for a meeting of himself, Brandt and a GK visiting clergyman, N. H. van der Walt is not clear, but Brandt reported that the meeting was called to discuss cooperation among the three churches and again it came out that the United Church (NGK) wants but only to swallow us up. I made it very clear to D3. van Zijl that there could be no such talk, and that only when such thoughts were completely removed from his head and there was no more talk about it, could he expect the Hervormers to cooperate on educational and other national affairs in this territory. In actuality, Brandt had no grounds for fearing the demise of his congregation in East Africa. With the exception of the GK in the 19403 the membership transfers of Vergenoeg to and from the smaller churches were not significant, as the following figures show:15 14Letter from Ds. Brandt, pg Hervormer, May 15, 1922, p. 6. 15There is record of only two transfers before 1920, one transferring to the GK from the NGK and one the reverse. Many of the transfers can be explained by marriages. It was customary for the wife to join the church of the husband if he belonged to another Dutch Reformed Church. See Vergenoeg, Deel I, no. 2, March, 1946, p. 9. 165 Members of Vergenoeg NGK Transferring to and From Rens- burgrus NHK and Eldoret GK Transfer to: Transfer from: NRR GK NHK GK 1920-29 13 4 2 3 1930-39 8 3 2 8 1940-49 11 4 15 25 1950-59 21 4 18 7 1960-69 1 2 5 3 Totals 54 17 42 46 Nevertheless, inter-denominational tensions persisted throughout this period. The divisiveness in the community was not severe enough to force its members into British institutions. The number of transfers to English churches was minimal.16 However, social clubs were more important to Plateau British settlers and few Afrikaners joined these. The Eldoret Sports Club founded before World War I had a mixed membership but receded in importance after the Eldoret Club was founded in 1919.17 Though a few Afrikaner names 16Vergenoeg had three transfers to English churches during this period. Vergenoeg Gemeente Membership List. It is unlikely that the other two churches had more than three. 17KNA, DC/UG/Z/l, UG District Political Record File--Social. 166 (as well as African) were on the membership list of the latter club in 1969, those Afrikaners interviewed indicated that few had been invited to join before World War II. Other Plateau clubs such as the Sergoit Club and the Kaptagat Club were also very British. British settlers showed little concern for integrating Afrikaners into their clubs and the Afrikaners remained loyal to their own insti- tutions. The colonial administration was concerned with this problem and expressed its concern through its educational policies. As has been noted the Uasin Gishu had three educational systems for Europeans by 1918: English govern- ment-supported farm schools; English Eldoret Central School: and Afrikaans private schools. These three systems Operated concurrently until the 19303. In all three systems Afrikaner children dominated: the private or parochial schools and the government-supported farm schools ‘were exclusively Boer and the Eldoret Central School was about three-fourths Boer in 1919.18 The Education Department was conscious Of its :responsibility to educate the Plateau children and it (attempted to do so efficiently with local support. The :report of the 1919 Education Commission recommended the continuation of the farm schools as many Afrikaners wished 18Evidence given by the Principal of the Eldoret Central School to the Education Commission of the East African Protectorate, 1919, pp. 43-45. 167 and advocated increasing the number of standards at both the Nakuru and Eldoret central schools beyond Standard IV to the Standard VI matriculation level. This would permit more Uasin Gishu students to receive higher levels Of edu- cation near the influence of the Afrikaner community and their churches. The Commission frowned on the use of locally trained teachers and advocated using only British university trained personnel in the central schools. It condoned locally trained teachers who knew the 2221 (Afrikaans) for farm schools. This was approved by the Afrikaners even though it meant that these teachers were inadequately trained. Both the Education Commission and the Education Department were adamant on the use Of English as the language medium. The Education Commission said: "In all EurOpean schools English should be the medium of education and we do not think there is any considerable body of Opinion among the non-English inhabitants Of the Protector- ate that any other medium should be used."19 However, the Education Commission saw no reason why opportunity for religious instruction should not be permitted in the Schools and 19CO East African Series--Pamphlets, found in the report Of the Education Commission Of the East African Protectorate, 1919. Report also found in LBEA, February 28, 13,20, p. 23. The Education Department had insisted on the “Se of English in all government-supported schools since the opening of the farm schools in 1910. 168 . . . in this connection the teaching of Dutch must be considered. . . . The Commission sees no objection to Dutch being taught as an optional additional subject in those schools on the Plateau where there are Dutch children. The teaching of Dutch will necessarily dis- place some other subjects for those who take it. That disadvantage is however we consider outbalanced by the advantage of giving Dutch children the 8pportunity of becoming well grounded in their faith.2 Insistence on the use of English was motivated more by cultural arrogance and institutional inertia than by a desire to bring about the integration of the two communi- ties. The Afrikaner clergymen recognized that Government insistence upon English schools would subvert Afrikaner culture in Kenya. TO avoid that possibility Loubser had set up private Afrikaans schools shortly after his arrival in East Africa and continued to agitate for the use Of Afrikaans in government schools. After the war he appeared to have accepted the fact that the Government would not 201bid., Evidence of the Education Commission of the East African Protectorate, 1919. The Commission's recommendations were more liberal towards the Afrikaner community than were the recommendations of one Afrikaner instructor at the Eldoret Central School, Miss Maria Elizabeth Cloete. Miss Cloete told the Commission: "If peOple want Dutch I should teach it. The minister wants it for religious purposes. If parents require it I should provide Dutch teaching for three hours a week. It could be taken after school hours. If parents are so very keen they might pay for the teaching. If it were given I think the parents would soon lose their keenness." Miss Cloete reported that the Boer children frequently needed to use the 2331 their first few years in school but that they learned English very quickly. She also expressed concern over the quality Of teachers which were being used in the farm schools and advocated acquiring teachers from South Africa or England for these schools. Miss Cloete was the daughter Of C. J. Cloete. 169 support non-English schools and turned to South Africa for assistance for his private schools. With finality he declared: "Without education we have no future."21 Other clergymen from South Africa also recognized the dangers of anglicization. Vergenoeg's pastor from 1918 to 1921, Ds. H. C. de Wet said: "Indeed, loss of the 2221 means loss of the Church, and loss of the Church goes hand in hand with the loss of morals [or customsl."22 Similarly G. J. van Zijl, de Wet's successor, warned that foreign influence had to be stOpped through the maintenance of the private Afri- 23 In spite of these continuous exhortations kaans schools. the Afrikaner community could not maintain the Broederstroom school during the hard times of the 19203. In 1921 the parents once again requested government assistance.24 The EQEA praised the "Dutch" for establishing their own schools and urged the government to give them assistance. Three schools were mentioned, Broederstroom, Sergoit, and a new 21M. P. Loubser, "De Boeren in de Kenia Kolonie," pg Kerkbode, Deel XII, no. 44, November 3, 1921, pp. 310-11. 22H. C. de Wet, report to 23 Kerkbode, Deel XII, no. 26, June 30, 1921, p. 743. 23G. J. van Zijl, "Cos-Afrika," 22 Kerkbode, Deel XIII, no. 28, July 12, 1922, pp. 905-06. 24This request for assistance did not mean that the [Broederstroom parents were ready to acquiesce to the govern- Inent on the language issue. They conditioned their re- ou an nooanuuaa meavsaux. .uo. non .a~.u.u.m.. vow-«a .u. .uoquundo snags: vs. .«aaxaqa .5» ca .vovaaucd on.) mood 00 «ac: haco uOu Icaau anda .0.a< .nuwuuau.u. .oczu :a vovsauc« uoc .u.) concuu. scans no u.~.u «diam ".uoz v.00 .0302. ”add usuu.u0c mo.m 000.n~ mm0.~ . . . . . . an.o 000.0 hon.” . . . . . . no.m 000.0 mon.~ . . . . . . mom“ .ov.m -.0 mvo.0v do”.n . . . . . . 0..m 00~.0~ hav.n um.na nmv.0n vo~.~ . . . . . . . . . . . . 000a .00.o ov.o ham..n 0mm.o . . . . . . 00.s 000..” .00.n n~.n hn«.«~ 05~.~ no.0 00n.n~ 00n.n 00.0 000.0 000 noon .00.m 60.. 050.00“ nun.mn 0~.r oo~.na nnm.~ #0.. 000.00 00v.o~ om." nm~.~m enm.~H om.n 00~.H van v~.n msn.v ora.” coma oom.n no.m «as.hnn ohn.a0 on.h 00n.o~ .00." un.n obv.~n~ 0n0.vn 00.0 0-.n.~ «05.nn en.v ouh.n~ hn~.n . . . . . . m00~ .mo.m mo.~ 0n~.m~ .m0m.- on.m voo.mao omn.vHH 00.. 0mm.mn Nov.» on.n hav.~n~ 0mm.nn 00.0 mnr.om~ n00.0n on.n nvr.s«H www.ma 00.n 050.v~ «mm.0 coma oo~.n n~.~ www.mn .0v0.«n 00.. voo.uoo n05.00H no.n www.mo ono.oa a... n.h.-a 000.n« 00.0 0.0.n0. nod... 0a.. £10.00 0m~.m~ oo.n 0m0.om 000.m« mood oaa.v o~.o 05n.moa ono.~n om.nm 0mm.~ 00" 00.0 n~o.o« rmo.n mv.n ~v~.~va 060.0A rm.n v00.- «no.0 no.0 0m«.v~ 0nm.n Noon ca... 00.0 0.0.0- nmu.n~ an.o 000.” so” vn.v 000.~ do. o~.~u huh.v~ ood.~ 0..n 000.0n n0a.0~ o~.n 066.0. ooh.~« flood Hm.n 0.6.00“ .v«.~n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0~.0 n-.vh a~a.- 0m.“ anm.naa onn.0~ 000a .uu. coaum .Ouud .uu. Ivan; ..uu< .uo. .uduu .Ihu< .nu. Ivan; ..uu¢ .uu. .u«us ..uu¢ .uu. oudua .Ouud 0.0 uuou nod :00 0.0 :00 u!— u.ou ~00 v.00 .4!— 0.00 a...» Ignace occlu< OF cacu.uu< or .oduc.04 ~quc.i:».>bo OF .c..a0usm u.£un op ou.c.x«uu< 09 U KHGZHmA< .oocsoa :4 .u. n.04um .mouoooa ..u.:.xauu< .5» kn vao. .oq.uu< 295 296 Acreage purchased by the Afrikaners, 1960-69. These statistics do not include acreage purchased from fellow Afrikaners. Prices are in pounds. Year Acres Price Cost per acre 1960 24,807 103,031 4.15 1961 18,430 52,861 2.87 r. 1962 13,911 33,795 2.43 f 1963 11,215 22,653 2.02 1964 17,637 27,577 1.56 _ 1965 . . . . . . i 1966 . . . . . . 1967 . . . . . . 1968 . . . . . . 1969 . . . . . . Note: Purchases of urban acreage are not included. Also, only the land transfers for the first half of 1969 were available. Information gathered from Land Registry Files, Kenya Land Office, Nairobi. CONGO ‘dmdn £0 CaifiCH SOMALI doficox . 4H2 2m. x 9... 3.52mi d>COX W» 3.1.0 . 9.383 r... 'l