Across the Limpopo
By JEROME CAMINADA Johannesburg THE 'great, grey-green greasy ' Limpopo is on the whole not a very wide river, as the big rivers of the world go, but measured by the growing contrast between the two ideologies on its opposite banks it is becoming as wide as an ocean. To the north, Rhodesia and other territories spread over the expanse of Africa accept the principle—though their methods vary in pace and detail—that the African must be absorbed or received into the white man's economic, and even his political, system. To the south, in the Union of South Africa, the Government grows more and more determined on paper that the African shall not be so absorbed or integrated, but shall be apart. In grouping Southern Rhodesia with the rest of Africa I do not mean that that country politically is marching step for step with, for example, the Gold Coast. But statements that have been made in Southern Rhodesia do show that, in looking to the future of the African, the colony faces north rather than south.
This fact is worth noticing. When the basis of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was being laid down Britain evidently thought that Southern Rhodesia was a little too close to South Africa, in outlook as well as geographically, to allow its Ministers who might step into Federal office to carry their powers over the African with them. She therefore saw to it that affairs directly touching the African did not fall to the Federal Government, but were retained by the three separate territorial governments. This meant that in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland she controlled them herself; and though she could not do exactly the same in self-governing Southern Rhodesia, she could crowd the government there into a well- watched corner. The reaction to this of Sir Godfrey Huggins, who was Primo Minister of Southern Rhodesia for twenty years—and Minister for Native Affairs for sixteen years—is that the British people would not trust their own blood relations in Central Africa to be fair and just in their dealings with the African Native.' Ho makes this comment in an outspoken article in the June issue of Optima, a quarterly review published by the Anglo-American Corporation of South Africa. Sir Godfrey also writes that the Colonial Office has pressed on at an alarming rate with political advancement far ahead of the average African's understanding or his economic advance.' From this statement one might argue that Britain was right in fearing that she might not see eye to eye with a Federal policy towards the African. Yet Sir Godfrey also makes it pretty clear that if the African shows parliamentary sense, and does not conduct an opposition based purely on colour, then more and more political power will come to him. He says : The provision of special representatives for Africans in the Federal Parliament must be regarded as a temporary expedient and of no great value compared with a Parliament in which every member has to consider his African constituents, even if they are only a minority, but who may be numerous enough to tip the scale in a number of constituencies. Then there will be no altruism in presenting the African case : it will be essential if the MP wishes to remain in Parliament. Advance along these lines, in keeping with the African's capabilities and standard of civilisation, appears to be the right course, even if it is slow."
At present Africans go on a common electoral roll—for Parliament, but not for local affairs—if they earn £240 a year or occupy property worth £500, and can complete unaided and in English the application form. So far fewer than 500 have sought or obtained this privilege. But Sir Godfrey, unless I ,am misjudging his words, foresees more and more African voters who, even if they were electing a white man, would, as he says, tip the scale. This is a different outlook from that of the Nationalists in South Africa; and it is not all. Mr. P. B. Fletcher, the present Minister for Native Affairs in Southern Rhodesia, has outlined plans for multi-racial hotels and inter-racial clubs, and has declared that the African is a permanent part of industry and must be provided for on that basis. He even intends apparently —though on this point he does not seem at all sure of himself —to allow the African freehold title to land on which he would live near industry. Dr. Vorwoerd, who holds the same portfolio south of the Limpopo, has, as we know, another outlook. His philosophy on the relationship between Africans and industry is, as far as I can make out after reading page after page of Hansard, that the Africans are in the towns in some disembodied, ephemeral sense only. One day—swish, they will have gonel and the white man, or perhaps some new atomic agent, will be doing the work instead. How else would the gold mines, for example, which can hardly be moved close to some shadowy African reserves, be worked ?
The Federation has no such will-of-the-wisp to dangle before the electorate. Nevertheless, I admit to a suspicion that the Ministers there, though they are capable of drastic action now and then, envy the laws in the Union, either made or in the making, which are meant to keep South Africa free of such disturbances as strikes. Conversely, I am sure too that the Nationalist Ministers chuckle to themselves when liberalism in other parts of Africa is repaid by boycotts or violence. Pure liberalism has a poor sale just now in South Africa—witness the Natal provincial elections in June where three Liberal Party candidates were put forward and between them polled 385 votes.
The difference in the Federation is not so much that an airy liberalism can be peddled there either, but that the politicians recognise how inevitable and permanent is the penetration of the African. They are trying to keep one step ahead of it lest it get ahead of them. In the Union the present Government has, on paper, set its face against the inevitable, but in reality has not been able to turn back the onward flow.
Previous page
