You are a detainee in terms of the Emergency Regulations promulgated under the Public Safety Act? - That is so, my Lord, I was arrested on the 30th March of this year...
Are you physically fit to give evidence in this case? - My Lord, as we are kept, we are rather in difficulty for the simple reason that I am suffering from cold, that is a common disease which affects me, and more particularly now that we are confined to the cell. It is very cold, we have to sleep on a cement floor, and my body is definitely aching. I am over fifty. The lighting conditions too in the cell are not bright, very dull, one cannot read much, and apart from that there is some provision made for the accused, where they call it a library where we could read and so on, but that cell is even colder, so I could not stay there for more than an hour, and that is one of my difficulties. So under those circumstances, if I give evidence only in the mornings, I think that would give me some relief.
Are you seated at the moment? You may be seated.
You were born in Johannesburg on the 5th of December 1908? - Yes, My Lord.
You attended the Government Indian School in Johannesburg? - Yes, My Lord, I attended the Government Indian School where I studied up to Standard Four.
Did you attend any other school in the afternoon? - Yes, in the afternoon I attended the Urdu School, and in the evenings the Gujarati school.
When did you go to India? - In the year 1924 I left for India.
What did you go to India for? - I went there to study and I went to a place called Deoband where the Muslim University is situated, and I attended that University as a student.
In what language did you study at the Deoband University? - I studied in Persian and Arabic, and it was through the medium of Urdu, our main language.
Did you study the Koran and the Hadis then? - Yes, I studied the Koran and the Hadis then, that is, the study of Prophet Mohammed and some Islamic laws.
Did you then qualify as a theologian and a teacher according to the tenets of Islam? - That is correct.
Did you also study Muslim law? - Yes.
When did you qualify? - In 1930.
When did you return to South Africa? - In 1931.
I understand that during your youth and student days certain factors had a profound influence on your political viewpoint? - That is so.
Would you say that these factors determined your approach and outlook when you became politically active in later years? - That is correct.
Would I be correct in saying that you have accepted the method of passive resistance as a method of political struggle? - Yes, that is so.
I want you to describe the factors which influenced you during your youth and student days which led you to accept the concept of passive resistance as a form of political struggle. I understand that the earliest political influence on you came from your father in the period before you left for India in 1924. Is that correct? - Yes, that is correct. In 1924 the Government introduced a bill called the Class Areas Bill, which was designed to segregate all the Indians. The Indian community at that time was very, very agitated, and as a result of that, meetings used to be held - a lot of meetings were held throughout the country, also demonstrations took place in most of the centres...
I will come to that later, will you just for the moment answer the questions that I put to you. Was your father politically active at the time? - Yes.
What was the nature of his political activity? - He was the President of the Transvaal British Indian Association. That was the political organisation of the Indian community in the Transvaal, and he was actively participating in all the struggles that Mahatma Gandhi who was here at the time...
He was closely associated with the late Mahatma Gandhi? - Quite.
Did Mahatma Gandhi hold any position in this Association? - Yes, he was the Secretary of the Transvaal British Indian Association. My father was the President of the Association.
What was his outlook on the question of passive resistance as a method of struggle? - My father accepted the method of passive resistance as the principal method for the redress of the grievances as far as the Indian question was concerned.
Now at Deoband University, apart from your religious teaching, did you also come under the political influence of your teachers? - Yes. The majority of the professors who were connected with this university were either members of the Indian National Congress or they belonged to an organisation called the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Hind. This was an organisation of all the Muslim learned people in India which worked for the liberation of India, and fought side by side and in alliance with the Congress till the Indian people achieved independence.
Was your political outlook in any way influenced by the teachings of the Islamic religion? - Yes, certainly.
Does the Islamic religion have an attitude on matters relevant to the inter-relations of people? - Yes. We believe in the equality of man. All men are equal.
Does the Islamic religion impose upon you as a teacher and a theologian any duties in regard to the carrying out of the fundamental tenets of Islam, equality being one as you have just mentioned? - Yes, tolerance, justice and so on.
I don`t know if you understood my question. Does the Islamic religion impose upon you a duty? - Yes, it does, to carry out the teachings of Islam in which we believe - that tolerance and justice and so on should be meted out to all.
During your stay at Deoband University and thereafter you were of course aware of the political activities and teachings of Mahatma Gandhi? - Quite so.
Were you in any way influenced by Gandhi`s teachings? - Yes, I accepted satyagraha as the principle for attaining any of our objects.
Now on your return to South Africa in 1931, did you concern yourself with the welfare of the Indian community? - Yes, but I did not take any politically active part at the moment.
Were you a member of the Transvaal Indian Congress? - Yes, by virtue of its constitution which lays down that every member of the Indian community who is above the age of eighteen automatically becomes a member of the organisation.
When did you first begin to take an active part in the political activities of the community? - In 1938.
Was there any particular reason why you became active in 1938? - Yes, in that year the Minister of the Interior, Mr. Stuttaford, announced a scheme which was known as Servitude Scheme, which meant that if in any given area, 75 percent of the population residing there decide that the area should become an area for the white population only, then all the other members of the non-European groups should leave that area for European occupation only. As a result of that we thought and we believed that a great injustice would be meted out to the non-Europeans as a whole, and at that stage I thought I should participate in the active politics of the country.
So I would be correct in saying that you first began to take an active part in the political activities in a movement in opposition to the Servitude Scheme? - That is correct.
Did this opposition to the Servitude Scheme give birth to any non-European political organisation? - Yes, because this scheme was actually directed against the non-European people as a whole, the Non-European people - that means the Coloureds, the Indians and the Africans - throughout the country protested against this scheme, and as a result of that an organisation called Non-European United Front was established under the leadership of Mrs. Z. Gool in Cape Town and thereafter independently a similar committee was formed in Johannesburg. This was called the Non-European United Front of Transvaal.
And were you a member of the Non-European United Front? - Yes, I was one of the Council members of that organisation.
Was that the Committee? - Yes.
And what was the purpose of the Non-European United Front? - To bring about unification and cooperation amongst all sections of the people, and to oppose the Servitude Scheme which was announced by the Minister of the Interior.
Can you give the Court a brief description of the type of activities conducted by this organisation? - This organisation staged demonstrations, and one of the biggest demonstrations was staged in Cape Town, where thousands of people marched towards the House of Parliament in that year.
In 1939 as a result of legislation against the Indian community, was a Passive Resistance Council formed? - Yes, my Lords, as a result of opposition by all sections of the non-white population, this scheme was dropped and an Act...
We will come to that later. Were you a member of the Passive Resistance Council? - Yes.
Now I would like you to describe briefly the position that you held in the Transvaal Indian Congress. When did you first become a member of the Working Committee? - In 1945.
Did you also become a member of the Executive Committee? - Yes, the following year.
Until what year did you retain your position as an Executive Member of the Transvaal Indian Congress? - Up to 1954, when I was banned under Ministerial order.
Did you also hold a position as Vice-President of the Transvaal Indian Congress? - I think it must be 1946 or 1947.
Were you also a secretary of the Transvaal Indian Congress? - Yes.
Do you remember when? - From 1951 to 1954.
Were you also a member of the Executive Committee of the South African Indian Congress (SAIC)? - Yes.
What year? - I think from 1947 or 1948, up to 1954.
Now I understand that during the years 1946 to 1954 you were in addition connected with various other organisations and committees. Were you a member of the Joint Passive Resistance Council of the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses established in 1946? - Yes.
What was the purpose of this Council? - To conduct passive resistance as a protest against the Asiatic Land Tenure and Indian Representation Act of 1946.
Was that why it was called the Passive Resistance Council? - That is right.
Is it correct that in 1952 the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress set up a National Action Committee? - Yes.
Were you a member of this Committee? - I was.
Do you know how many members were on this committee? - There were seven members.
Do you regard yourself as a Communist? - No.
Have you ever been a Communist? - No, never...
I want to refer you to A.M.K. 44 1 Exhibit number , which is the Agenda Book of the South African Indian Congress Conference held at the Gandhi Hall, Johannesburg, on the 19th, 20th and 21st October, 1956. Now in the section dealing with the Constitution I want to read out the objects of the South African Indian Congress, and I want you to tell me later whether those were the objects of the SAIC as you know them.
"The objects of the South African Indian Congress shall be:
Were those the objects of the South African Indian Congress? - Yes.
Was a more detailed policy adopted by the Natal Indian Congress in 1945? - Yes.
What was this policy known as? - It was known as the Ten Point Programme.
I want to refer to the Agenda Book of the Natal Indian Congress Conference held in Durban on the 31st of May to the 1st of June, 1947. On page 2 of the section dealing with the Secretarial Report, in paragraph 6, the ten points are mentioned.
Now since 1947 have these ten points been substantially the policy of the South African Indian Congress as well? - Yes, that is so.
What has been the policy of the SAIC on the question of discriminatory laws against Indians? - The policy is one of abolishing these discriminatory laws.
I shall at a later stage return to the attitude of the SAIC to the other non-European groups. At the moment I want to restrict myself to the Indian community. You have already told the Court that the policy of the South African Indian Congress was inter alia the removal of the discriminatory laws. I want to now deal with some of the laws which played a prominent part in the campaigns of Indian political organisations and which formed a background against which the policy of the South African Indian Congress grew. Firstly, I want to deal with Law 3 of 1885. What was its broad effect in regard to freehold property? - This was the first law enacted by the Transvaal Government in 1885, whereby Indians were first deprived of owning any fixed property.
And about citizenship rights? - They were also deprived of citizenship rights, but they were allowed to trade, provided they obtained a licence for 25 which was subsequently reduced to 3.
Did the Indian community campaign against this law? - Yes, the Indian community made representations to the government, it submitted petitions and they interviewed the British Agent who was stationed at Pretoria in those days, in view of the fact that under the London Convention of 1884 Indians were regarded as British subjects and were entitled to enter into any trade whatsoever, any trade and manufacturing, and they were also entitled to buy land for their property. And therefore they approached the British Agent, who also very strongly took up the matter.
The next law that I want to deal with briefly is Law No. 15 of 1898, which I believe was repealed and re-enacted in 1908? - That is so. It is commonly known as the Gold Law.
Briefly describe how this law affected Indians in regard to ownership of land in proclaimed areas and occupation of land in proclaimed areas? - Insofar as ownership of land is concerned, they were debarred from occupying in the proclaimed areas for the purposes of residence, but they were allowed to trade in proclaimed areas.
In regard to immigration, I want to refer you to the 1902 Transvaal Ordinance. What was the effect on Indian immigration into the Transvaal? - Immediately after the cessation of war, 2 The South African War of 1899-1902 an Ordinance was passed which was generally known as Peace Preservation Ordinance, which checked on the people who came to the Colony. Before the war Indians were quite entitled to enter into the Colony, but since this Ordinance of 1902, they would only be allowed provided they would prove that they had been in the Transvaal before, and therefore no new immigration was allowed - rather no newcomers were allowed to enter into the Transvaal.
Do I understand that prior to 1902 there were no such restrictions? - No.
Was there a further law dealing with immigration in 1913? - Yes, Immigration Regulation Act of 1913.
What was its effect? - According to that Act no new Indian immigrant could enter into the Union from that date...
Did this Act impose restrictions on the movement of Indians between the provinces? - That is correct, that was also one of the provisions, that the resident of one province cannot enter into the other province freely.
What formalities do you have to comply with in order to visit another province? By you I mean Indians? - They apply to the Immigration Office for a permit and if he gets a permit, he would be entitled to enter into another province. If an Indian has entered into another province on a permit he cannot reside there for more than three months a year...
What effect did the Township Act of 1908 have on the Indians` right to trade? - The Township Act... meant that any township which would carry a clause debarring the Non-Europeans to occupy lands or premises... the non-European people, would not be able to occupy land or premises in these townships.
Prior to 1919 were there any restrictions in regard to the formation and operation of Indian companies? - No, there was no restriction in forming Indian companies before 1919, and there is no restriction now to form an Indian company.
Were there restrictions promulgated in 1919 to prevent Indian companies from operating in certain fields? - The Asiatic private companies were not entitled to hold fixed properties since 1919.
Under the Mines and Works Act, is the position of Indians in skilled trades affected in any way? - Yes, they were debarred from becoming skilled workers.
Was the position of Indian ownership of shares in private companies dealt with by the legislature in 1932? - Yes, the Asiatic Land Tenure Act of 1932. Under this Act any Asiatic private company was not entitled to hold any fixed property at all, whereas in 1919 any company, even a private company holding fixed property, if the Asiatics had a few shares in that or the minority shareholding, that was permissible, but from 1932 no private company was entitled to own fixed property.
Coming to nominees, was the position of nominees also dealt with by the legislature in 1932? - Yes. The position of nominee holding was such that in the year 1888 an Indian firm in Klerksdorp purchased a property from public auction, and when the papers were sent to Pretoria to register a transfer, it was then informed by the registrar that Indians cannot be registered holder of such property... since then the practice of holding properties by Europeans on behalf of Indians started, and that practice grew and remained as such until 1932. Although there was a lot of risk attached to that, the Indian people preferred that way, because there was consent of the government to holding properties in that manner. In 1932 nominee holdings were totally stopped.
Now coming to 1939, what steps were taken by the legislature in regard to the occupation of land by Indians? - In 1939 an Act called Asiatic Land and Trading Act was introduced... By virtue of that Act the position of the Indians in the Transvaal in relation to business, trading and residence, was pegged; that means they were only able to occupy those premises which were already in occupation by members of the Indian community on that date. This Act was an interim measure for two years.
Prior to 1939 were there any such restrictions outside the townships and the gold proclaimed areas? - No, Indians could take up legally any occupation on any land or premises anywhere in the Transvaal, with of course those two exceptions.
Was this Asiatic Land Act followed by the Pegging Act of 1943? - Yes, that is correct.
Did the Pegging Act apply only to the Transvaal? - No, it applied to Natal as well.
Were there any restrictions in Natal prior to that date? - Not of occupation only, but in regard to the ownership of properties too, there were no restrictions whatsoever.
Were these two measures then consolidated in an Act of Parliament in 1946? - Yes, the Asiatic Land Tenure and Indian Representation Act was passed in 1946, whereby no further occupation and ownership of the Indians were allowed, that they did not occupy on that date. But this Act recognised one principle, and that was of the trade, that there was no restriction on the trading, for the purpose of trading, as it was ever since 1885, as far as the Transvaal is concerned, since the Indians came into the Transvaal.
Now referring to Natal, is it correct to say that the history of the struggle of the Indian political organisations is closely linked with what happened to the people in Natal? - That is correct.
When did the Indians first arrive in Natal? - Indians first came to Natal in 1860. The first batch came in 1860 as a result of very lengthy negotiations which went on between the Natal Government and the British Government on the one hand and the Indian government on the other hand, and after some years of negotiations eventually an agreement was reached whereby the Indians were brought - rather the indentured labourers were brought to Natal.
This followed the abolition of slavery? - Yes.
Did these indentured labourers come on any fixed contract? - Yes. They came on a fixed contract to work at a certain wage, I think about ten shillings a month, for a period of three years, which was afterwards increased to five years.
Were there any conditions attached to the agreement as to what would happen to the labourers after their term of indenture expired? - Yes, on expiration of their contract, if they wished to go to India, they would be given a free passage back, and in case they stay in this country, they would stay as free citizens under the common law of the government at the time.
I believe that at about this time also another type of Indian came into Natal, known as free immigrants? - Yes, there was no legal restriction attached to any Indians coming into Natal, and therefore quite a number of people who were domiciled in Mauritius or carrying on trade there, they came here. And quite a number of Indian traders followed from India, from various provinces, particularly from the Western part of India.
What was the predominant form of Indian immigration at this time? - Indentured.
Were the indentured Indians allowed to farm after their period of indenture had expired? - After a while, after a few years this flow of indentured labourers slackened, and as a result of that the Natal Government again made representation to India, and in 1874 a Bill was passed by the Natal Government giving more facilities to these indentured labourers if they did not wish to return to India. If they wished to stay in this country, they would be given a plot of land to farm on, given for free.
How long did this position continue? - It remained so till 1891.
What happened then? - In 1891 the facilities were taken away, and instead if the indentured labourer wished to remain in this country, he was subjected to a poll tax of 3 to be paid annually by him. 3 The 3 tax was introduced by the Indian Immigration Amendment Act of Natal in 1895.
Was the immigration of Indians into Natal ever restricted? - Yes, in 1897, some restrictions came into operation. 4 Under the Immigration Restriction Act of 1897.
What was the position with regard to the Parliamentary franchise in Natal prior to 1896? - Indians were entitled to a franchise right in Natal up to 1894. In that year the franchise was taken away by an Act of Parliament. 5 Natal enacted a law in 1894 to deprive Asiatics of Parliamentary franchise, but Royal assent for the law was denied after protests by the Indian community. In 1896, Natal enacted another law with the same effect, but without specific mention of "Asiatics", and it received assent.
Were all Indians entitled? - Yes.
Indentured labourers? - Those would become free, immediately their contract is over, my Lord, and entitled to franchise rights.
Free immigrants? - Free immigrants were entitled to franchise rights.
As a matter of interest, how big were these plots of land which were given to them? - A few acres of land, which would be sufficient for the upkeep of that family.
Could you tall us what the provisions were with regard to the Municipal franchise before and after 1924? - The Indians were entitled to Municipal franchise up to 1924, and in that year they were deprived of that franchise as well.
What effect did the 1946 Asiatic Land Tenure Act have on Indian ownership and occupation of land in Natal? - This was the first time in history that Indians were debarred from occupation and ownership of land in Natal.
Is it correct to say that from 1946 onwards the position of Indians has, briefly speaking, been the same throughout the Union in regard to the occupation and ownership of land, with the exception of the Cape, I should say? - That is correct.
And with the exception of the Cape where the Indians enjoyed a limited form of franchise, is it correct that the same can be said of the franchise? - Yes, that is correct.
Coming to 1950, is it correct that the Group Areas Act perpetuated the prohibitions against Indians acquiring land owned by other groups? - That is so.
Is it correct that the Group Areas Act for the first time exposed the Indian community to the dangers of having their land confiscated? - Yes, that is so. Powers were given under the Act that if any land is held illegally perhaps or it becomes illegal at any time... then the land may be confiscated. This is the first time confiscation of the properties really began.
How has the South African Indian Congress regarded the wide powers which the Minister of the Interior has under the Group Areas Act? - The Indians believed that these wide powers in the hands of the Minister was something like dictatorial powers, which affect the Indian community in practically every aspect of their lives, and this is the first time in the history of South Africa that Indians were subjected to be ruled by proclamation.
What in the opinion of the South African Indian Congress was the real intention and policy of this Act? - This Act, the Indian people mean, was to exterminate the Indian community and to repatriate them if possible from this country.
Was this view of the SAIC strengthened by the reports of any government committee? - Yes. The Joint Committee on the Land Tenure was established by the Minister of the Interior, and the findings were published just before this Act was enacted in Parliament, and there was the sort of reason given in the report.
To your knowledge was a part of this Committee`s report contained in any of the publications of the South African Indian Congress? - Yes, I think there is in one of the Agenda Books, in a secretarial report I think it was mentioned.
I want to refer to a paragraph in the Agenda Book of the South African Indian Congress Conference held in Johannesburg in 1956, A.M.K. 44, and I want you to tell me whether this is what you are referring to. Under Annexure A2, pages 2 and 3 of A.M.K. 44, my Lords, I am reading on page 2, it is a quotation from the report of the Inter-Departmental Subcommittee appointed in 1948:
"Before stating our recommendations we feel that reference should be made to the one matter which, strictly speaking, falls outside our terms of reference but which is so closely associated in the public mind with the Asiatic question that it has a determining influence on the evidence tendered to us and accordingly also on recommendations based on such evidence, and that is the possibility of repatriating the Asiatics from South Africa.
"There appears to be an ever-growing belief in the public mind that the only satisfactory solution of the Asiatic question is repatriation, and that whatever is done by way of legislation, should be such as not to endanger the possibility of repatriation and deprive the public of one of its most deeply cherished hopes.
"The fundamental theme of the evidence throughout the years has been and still is: repatriation or, failing which, compulsory segregation. In the most recent evidence there is noticeable a distinct tendency for this thheme to assume the form of repatriation, and, pending which, compulsory segregation. In its most advanced form this then reads: repatriation and, failing which, compulsory segregation, with boycott to induce repatriation."
Was that the report you were referring to? - Yes...
Has this attitude, this sort of attitude to the knowledge of the South African Indian Congress been altered in any way? - No.
Also in this connection I want to refer you to statements purported to have been made by Ministers and others in responsible positions in connection with this question. Firstly, I want to refer to a statement alleged to have been made by Mr. W. A. Maree, Member of Parliament for Newcastle, and at present Minister of Bantu Education, as reported in the Natal Witness of the 23rd of June 1956.
"'After the effect of the Group Areas Act had been felt, Indians will only be too pleased to get out of South Africa`, said Mr. W.A. Maree at a report back meeting held in the Town Hall."
Next I want to quote from the Manifesto of the Nationalist Party in 1948.
"The Party holds the view that Indians are a foreign and outlandish element which is unassimilable. They can never become part of the country and they must therefore be treated as an immigrant community." (From the Programme and Principles of the Nationalist Party)
Does the South African Indian Congress accept these statements as having been made by the Minister concerned and by the Nationalist Party? - Yes...
Are you aware of a statement made by the former Chairman of the Group Areas Board, Mr. de Vos Huge, who is at present a Judge in the Supreme Court, about the Indians and the Group Areas Act? - Yes, where he refers to the fact that the Indians - somthing to the effect that they are undesirable and they are robbers.
If I put this sentence to you, would you be able to recognise it? "Indians were a band of robbers who won`t part with their ill-gotten gains, unless forced to do so". Is that what you are referring to? - Yes.
When was this said? - A couple of years ago.
Where? - I think it was in Pretoria.
Was it on any particular occasion? - I don`t know whether there was a press statement or something to that effect.
Did it appear in the press? - Yes.
I want now to refer you to a resolution passed at a Conference of the South African Indian Congress in 1950 on the Group Areas Act. It is contained in Exhibit G.5. Were you present at that conference? - Yes.
...I was about to read from Exhibit G.5A on page 10 of which is a resolution passed at a conference of the South African Indian Congress in 1950. It is a resolution on the Group Areas Act.
2. The Conference wholeheartedly supports the decision of the Government of India not to participate in the Round Table Conference with the Union Government, as such a conference would have been one-sided with the object of expatriating the whole Indian community of South Africa, and taking the question of the treatment of Indians in South Africa to the United Nations Assembly.
3. The Conference therefore calls upon:
Was that the resolution passed at that Conference? - Yes.
Why does the South African Indian Congress claim the abolition of all discriminatory laws against Indians? - My Lords, the reason in asking to abolish all the discriminatory laws is because the Indian community feels that the Government should honour the promises they have made from time to time and the undertaking which was made by the Government from the very inception when the Indian people were brought to this country.
Would you agree that the long history of legislative attacks on the rights of the Indian people to own and occupy land is designed primarily to completely ruin the community? - Yes, that is how we see it.
Is it the view of the South African Indian Congress that if the Indian people in the Transvaal in particular are prevented from carrying on normal trade, it would result in its complete ruination? - Yes, that is so.
As a result of almost eighty years of trading, is it correct to say that the bulk of the Indians are not trained for any other occupation? - That is correct.
In the field of civil service, have Indians access as employees in Government Departments? - Not to my knowledge, except in schools.
Have there been any avenues open to them in the police force for instance? - May be, but very few, I don`t know, but I don`t think so.
Have any avenues of employment been open to them in the army? - No.
In the field of labour other than commerce, are there any avenues of employment open? - No, if there are, there are very few, for instance working in the shops, but then that too may be affected by the Group Areas Act, I suppose.
To your knowledge, is there one skilled boilermaker, fitter and turner, miner, woodworker in the Indian community in the Transvaal? - No, none.
Is this lack of skilled labour among the Indians due to choice or due to lack of facilities? - Lack of facilities.
In the professions, apart from medicine, law and teaching, is there access to Indians? - No.
Do you know of one Indian dentist or engineer who has qualified in South Africa? - No, none.
How do you explain the absence of Indians in the other professions? - Because they have no facilities at all.
Can Indians become chartered accountants or pharmacists? - It would be very difficult indeed for them to get their apprenticeship even if they qualify at the University, but there is no course open for them, I understand, as far as pharmacy is concerned...
Do you regard the struggle of the South African Indian Congress as a struggle for the very survival of the Indians in this country? - Certainly.
We have so far dealt with the Indian community only. It is common cause that the South African Indian Congress did not concern itself with the position of the Indian community only. In this connection I want to refer to the Agenda Book of the South African Indian Congress of 1952, on page 2 of the Secretarial Report. I would like to read a resolution and ask you whether that is the policy of the South African Indian Congress. This was a Conference of the South African Indian Congress, held at the Duncan Hall, Johannesburg, on January 25-27, 1952. Do you remember this Conference? - Yes.
I read from paragraph 5 on page 2 of the Secretarial Report:
"After giving serious consideration to the dangerous situation facing the people of South Africa, the last Conference unanimously passed the following resolution: `Conference acclaims the growing unity of the oppressed non-white people of the Union of South Africa as reflected in the mighty united action of June 26, 1950, the national day of protest and mourning. The South African Indian Congress, believing in the establishment of a true democracy embracing all South Africans, white and non-white, pledges to continue in its sustained endeavours to that end. In particular the Conference is of the considered opinion that in order to meet the challenge of the Nationalist Government and attacks on the liberty of the people of South Africa, the South African Indian people must:
The report then goes on to say:
"Your Congress devoted its time and energy in implementing the above resolution. This task was made easier because of the successful action of the people, African, Coloured and Indian, on the 1st May and the 26th June, 1950. On these days the non-European people of South Africa displayed a keen sense of discipline and peaceful determination. Their fraternal solidarity and unity of purpose has already made a definite change and has ushered in a new era of struggle against oppression, exploitation and racial persecution."
You remember that report? - Yes.
Now would you agree that from this time onwards the cooperation which had already existed between the South African Indian Congress and the African National Congress was transformed into a more or less permanent alliance? - Yes, into an alliance.
What was the principal method used by the Indian Congress to pursue its aims? - The Indian Congress used the method of non-violence and satyagraha in order to pursue its aims.
Is this also known as passive resistance? - Yes.
Who was the originator of this method? - The originator of this method was Mahatma Gandhi.
Did Tolstoy have anything to do with the development of the idea of passive resistance? - Tolstoy was a great passive resister and a Christian and when Mahatma Gandhi conducted passive resistance struggle in the Transvaal, he approved of it.
Where was Gandhi when he originated the passive resistance as a method of struggle? - He was here in South Africa.
During what period was this? - The active form of passive resistance which was embarked upon was from 1906 to 1914...
The adoption of the method of passive resistance by the South African Indian Congress, would you say, is influenced in any way by the passive resistance movement of Mahatma Gandhi? - Yes, not only that, but it is a continuation of that struggle.
I understand that it is a historical fact that Mahatma Gandhi came to South Africa in 1893? - That is so.
Did he have anything to do with the founding of the Natal Indian Congress? - Yes. Originally he came to South Africa for one year to advise some of his clients on a law suit, and after the year expired, when he saw things here, the Indian community asked him to stay for the difficulties they were facing at the time. He decided that they must form an organisation, and through the medium of that organisation the Indian community should work. He is the founder of the Natal Indian Congress in 1894 and he formed this Congress really on the basis of the Indian National Congress which existed in India at the time...
As a result of the numerous discriminatory laws which you spoke about, did Gandhi develop this new form of struggle at about the beginning of the century? - Yes, that is so.
Did Gandhi form a political organisation in the Transvaal? - Yes, in 1902 or 1903 he formed the Transvaal British Indian Association.
I understand that in 1906 the Transvaal Government passed an ordinance providing for the compulsory registration of Asiatics and their identification by means of fingerprints? - Yes, that is so.
What did the Transvaal British Indian Association do about it? - At the time the Transvaal was a Crown Colony, and they made a protest and eventually a deputation consisting of Gandhi and other members of the Indian community went over to England to interview the British Government there, as well as to educate the British public opinion to see that this measure is not passed.
Mr. Gandhi and Mr. H. O. Ally visited England as representatives of the Transvaal Indians from October 20 to December 1, 1906.
He also informed the Colonial Secretary at that time that if this measure will be passed, then we will rather disobey the law and go to prison. As a result of this representation, the (ordinance) was disallowed by the British Government.
Was the same measure re-enacted at a later stage? - Yes, in 1907 when the Transvaal got responsible government, the same measure was re-enacted as Act 2 of 1907.
Now you have already told the Court that in the year 1907 an Act restricting Indian immigration was passed? - Yes, that is so.
As a result of this measure, what steps did the Indian community take? - When this Act was passed the Transvaal British Indian Association held a public meeting in which they decided not to obey the provisions of the Act and instead rather go to gaol, and defy the law. In that meeting, pledges were also taken from the people and to that effect a resolution was passed. Later on, those who were prepared to defy made the same pledge in writing, which was taken and signed by the people who were like volunteers, and they did defy the law thereafter. The way of defiance at the time against this law was that they would not, as the law required them, go and register at a certain date...
This was the first passive resistance? - This was the first resistance ever started.
Was it also directed against the requirement that fingerprints should be given as a means of identification? - Yes.
Was the Transvaal British Indian Association alone in this particular campaign, or did it work with other groups? - This law applied to the Chinese community as well. Therefore the Indian Association formed an alliance with the Chinese association at the time and both communities took the action jointly...
Now, apart from actually defying this law, did the campaign take any other form? - Yes, the volunteer corps was established and one of their duties was to work as pickets, at the immigration and other registration offices where they were established. Also people trading without licences, so that they could be arrested. Also, people crossed the borders from Natal to the Transvaal in defiance of the Act.
Was it only Indians who went to gaol in this campaign? - Apart from the Indians and the Chinese some Europeans also went to gaol, like Mr. Kallenbach 2 Mr. Hermann Kallenbach, a European architect in Johannesburg, became a devoted friend and co-worker of Mahatma Gandhi. He served a term of imprisonment during the satyagraha in 1913. and so on.
Do you know if the Europeans set themselves up into any organisation to help the passive resistance movement? - Yes, there was a European Committee who sympathised with the movement, under the leadership of the late Mr. William Hosken. 3 Mr. Hosken, a leader of the Progressive Party in the Transvaal and former President of the Association of Chambers of Commerce of South Africa, became chairman of the Johannesburg Committee of Sympathisers with the cause of the Indians.
As a result of this campaign, did the authorities take any steps to negotiate with Gandhi? - Yes, when Mahatma Gandhi was arrested and was confined in gaol in Johannesburg, General Smuts sent an emissary, I think it was Mr. Albert Cartwright... 4 Mr. Cartwright, editor of the Transvaal Leader and member of the Progressive Party, helped arrange the provisional settlement of January 30, 1908.
Was any agreement arrived at, as a result of these negotiations? - Yes, General Smuts put forward some suggestions that if the Indian community immediately register themselves according to the Act, then at a later stage General Smuts would alter the various provisions which were objected to by the Indian community.
Did the Indian community carry out its part of the bargain? - Yes. Gandhi informed the Indian community of this negotiation.
Did the authorities carry out their part of the bargain? - No.
And what did the Indian people then do? - As a result of that another meeting was called where all these registration certificates were collected in advance - about 2,000 were collected in advance - and others were brought to the meeting, and they were all burnt.
Did this phase of the campaign take any other form besides the burning of the certificates? - Yes, as I mentioned...
I think you have answered this question, the crossing of borders and so on. Were large numbers of people again arrested? - Yes.
And was another settlement arrived at? - That is right. Eventually this matter was settled and the Act of 1907 was repealed. 5 Under a provisional settlement in May 1911, General Smuts agreed to repeal the Transval Asiatics Registration Act of 1907.
Was the passive resistance movement then called off? - Yes, it was suspended.
Did the Government make any other promises at the time about the rights of the Indian community? - Yes, they would also administer the laws affecting the Indians in a just manner and sympathetically.
How did Mahatma Gandhi and his followers regard the passing of the Immigration Act of 1913? - They thought at the time that this was not in conformity with the promise made.
I want to refer you to a telegram sent on behalf of the British Indian Association which is contained in the Report of the Indian Enquiry Commission of 1914. The telegram was sent by your father: 6 The telegram was sent by Mr. A. M. Cachalia, Chairman, British Indian
Association, to Lord Gladstone, Governor-General of South Africa, on June 16, 1913. The full text is reproduced in The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 12, page 112.
"VIEW PASSAGE IMMIGRATION BILL PARLIAMENT, MY ASSOCIATION WOULD RESPECTFULLY DRAW YOUR EXCELLENCY'S ATTENTION TO FOLLOWING OBJECTION BILL FROM STANDPOINT INDIAN COMMUNITY. BILL FAILS TO CARRY OUT THE PROVISIONAL SETTLEMENT IN THAT CONTRARY TO THAT SETTLEMENT IT TAKES AWAY EXISTING RIGHTS. IT RESTRICTS RIGHT APPEAL SUPREME COURT PRESENTLY EXISTING. IT DEPRIVES INDIANS RESIDENT NATAL OF FACILITY PRESENTLY ENJOYED, REENTER THAT PROVINCE AFTER ABSENCE ON STRENGTH OF THREE YEARS' PREVIOUS RESIDENCE, WHILE INDENTURED INDIANS WHO HAVE PAID 3 TAX MAY NOT UNDER BILL BE ALLOWED CLAIM RIGHT RESIDENCE THAT PROVINCE. IT TAKES AWAY RIGHT SOUTH AFRICA-BORN INDIANS ENTER CAPE UNDER ITS EXISTING STATUTE. FREE STATE DIFFICULTY REMAINS AS BEFORE IN THAT DECLARATION REQUIRED FROM EDUCATED INDIAN IMMIGRANT WHICH WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED FROM ANY OTHER IMMIGRANT AS IMMIGRANT."
As a result of what the Indian community regarded as a breach of faith, was another passive resistance movement started? - Yes.
When? - When this Act was introduced, objections were taken against the Bill and protests were made and also informed the Government at the time that if this Bill becomes an Act as it is, then they will renew the passive resistance movement.
What were the main issues in the campaign? - The main issues related to the abolition of the 3 tax, and...
Did the Indian people refuse to pay the tax? - Yes.
Were there strikes amongst the indentured labourers as part of the campaign? - Yes, there were strikes in the coal fields of Natal, also in the sugar plantations and other industries.
Was there any form of breach of the provincial barriers? - Yes, as part of the struggle Mahatma Gandhi marched to the Transvaal with over two thousand people in breach of the Provincial Barriers Act, and entered into the Transvaal.
What happened to the marchers? - Mahatma Gandhi, with other leaders like Mr. Kallenbach and Mr. Polak, was arrested. The marchers continued their march up to Balfour. From there they were sent back, to Natal.
Did any violence occur? - Not with the marchers, but during the strikes, yes, some people were killed there, four or five people.
How did that happen? - Shooting by the police.
Does the fact that violence occurred in this particular campaign make it fall outside Gandhi's principles? - No, not at all.
Why were these people shot by the police? - Because they went on strike, and there was compulsion in so many cases, there were demonstrations while the strike was on, and as a result the police fired shots.
Why did the police have to fire? - Because there were demonstrations by the strikers...
Why were they then shot by the police? - Because they did not disperse at the time.
Is that what you read up about it? - Yes.
Because they did not disperse? - Yes.
Is it always possible in your view, as happened in this case, as a result of the action of the authorities, that a purely peaceful demonstration can turn into violence? In your view, does the possibility always exist that as a result of the action of the police authorities, a peaceful demonstration can turn into violence or can turn into a bloodbath? - If the demonstrations are organised by the organisation which is leading the movement, their volunteers or their followers will not indulge in violence, but there is always a possibility that something might go wrong, police might shoot, or some other elements would come and do things. There is always a possibility of violence.
What would the duties of passive resisters be under these circumstances? - Even if they are attacked or even if violence occurred from any other side, their duty will be not to fight back, and not to take part in the violence.
What happened as a result of the 1913 passive resistance campaign? - As a result of these struggles here, the Government of India asked the Government of South Africa to appoint a commission of inquiry and to bring about some sort of settlement. As a result of that a Commission was appointed in 1914, and it made certain recommendations which became the basis of the settlement of the question at the time.
Do you know what sort of concessions were made? - The 3 tax was abolished, and an Act called the Indian Relief Act was passed, whereby the Indian marriages were regularised, and the domicile question of the Indian people in South Africa was settled.
Also as a result of this passive resistance, did there come into being an agreement between Gandhi and General Smuts? - Yes, this was the agreement. This agreement came about by negotiation between Mahatma Gandhi and General Smuts. It is generally known amongst our people as the Smuts-Gandhi agreement.
Does the South African Indian Congress regard this agreement as an important landmark in the history of the community? - Yes.
Is it correct that the Smuts-Gandhi agreement was actually contained in certain correspondence that passed between the two? - Yes, after consultation, discussion, and when the talks were final, it was reduced to writing by exchanging letters.
Will it be correct to say that the salient features of the agreement were: (a) the concessions that were made; (b) the Government promise to leave the rights of the Indians intact; and (c) the Indians called off the passive resistance campaign whilst reserving the right to continue to agitate for full civil rights for all? - That is so.
Is it true that during and after these struggles, Gandhi coined the term Satyagraha and began to expound the theory that lay behind it? - Yes, that is correct.
I would like to read an article by Mahatma Gandhi which is contained in the souvenir of the passive resistance movement in South Africa, 1906-1914...
1 The following is an article written by Mahatma Gandhi for the "Golden
Number" of Indian Opinion, released on December 1, 1914.
by M. K. Gandhi
I shall be at least far away from Phoenix if not actually in the Motherland when this Commemoration Issue is published. Without Passive Resistance there would have been no richly illustrated and important special issue of Indian Opinion, which has, for the last eleven years, in an unpretentious and humble manner, endeavoured to serve my countrymen and South Africa, a period covering the most critical stage that they will, perhaps, ever have to pass through. It marks the rise and growth of Passive Resistance, which has attracted world-wide attention. The term does not fit the activity of the Indian community during the past eight years. Its equivalent in the vernacular, rendered into English, means Truth-Force. I think Tolstoy called it also Soul-Force, or Love-Force, and so it is. Carried out to its utmost limit, this force is independent of pecuniary or other material assistance; certainly, even in its elementary form, of physical force or violence. Indeed, violence is the negation of this great spiritual force, which can only be cultivated or wielded by those who will entirely eschew violence. It is a force that may be used by individuals as well as by communities. It may be used as well in political as in domestic affairs. Its universal applicability is a demonstration of its permanence and invincibility. It can be used alike by men, women, and children. It is totally untrue to say that it is a force to be used only by the weak so long as they are not capable of meeting violence by violence. This superstition arises from the incompleteness of the English expression. It is impossible for those who consider themselves to be weak to apply this force. Only those who realise that there is something in man which is superior to the brute nature in him, and that latter always yields to it, can effectively be Passive Resisters. This force is to violence and, therefore, to all tyranny, all injustice, what light is to darkness. In politics, its use is based upon the immutable maxim that government of the people is possible only so long as they consent either consciously or unconsciously to be governed. We did not want to be governed by the Asiatic Act of 1907 of the Transvaal, and it had to go before this mighty force. Two courses were open to us - to use violence when we were called upon to submit to the Act, or to suffer the penalties prescribed under the Act, and thus to draw out and exhibit the force of the soul within us for a period long enough to appeal to the sympathetic chord in the governors or the law-makers. We have taken long to achieve what we set about striving for. That was because our Passive Resistance was not of the most complete type. All Passive Resisters do not understand the full value of the force, nor have we men who always from conviction refrain from violence. The use of this force requires the adoption of poverty, in the sense that we must be indifferent whether we have the wherewithal to feed or clothe ourselves. During the past struggle all Passive Resisters, if any at all, were not prepared to go that length. Some again were only Passive Resisters so-called. They came without any conviction, often with mixed motives, less often with impure motives. Some even, whilst engaged in the struggle would gladly have resorted to violence but for most vigilant supervision. Thus it was that the struggle became prolonged; for the exercise of the purest soul-force, in its perfect form, brings about instantaneous relief. For this exercise, prolonged training of the individual soul is an absolute necessity, so that a perfect Passive Resister has to be almost, if not entirely, a perfect man. We cannot all suddenly become such men, but, if my proposition is correct - as I know it to be correct - the greater the spirit of Passive Resistance in us, the better men we will become. Its use, therefore, is, I think, indisputable, and it is a force which, if it becomes universal, would revolutionise social ideals and do away with despotisms and the ever-growing militarism under which the nations of the West are groaning and are being almost crushed to death, and which fairly promises to overwhelm even the nations of the East. If the past struggle has produced even a few Indians who would dedicate themselves to the task of becoming Passive Resisters as nearly perfect as possible, they would not only have served themselves in the truest sense of the term, they would also have served humanity at large. Thus viewed, Passive Resistance is the noblest and the best education. It should come, not after the ordinary education in letters of children, but it should precede it. It will not be denied that a child, before it begins to write its alphabet and to gain worldly knowledge, should know what the soul is, what truth is, what love is, what powers are latent in the soul. It should be an essential of real education that a child should learn that, in the struggle of life, it can easily conquer hate by love, untruth by truth, violence by self-suffering. It was because I felt the force of this truth, that, during the latter part of the struggle, I endeavoured, as much as I could, to train the children at Tolstoy Farm and then at Phoenix along these lines, and one of the reasons for my departure to India is still further to realise, as I already do in part, my own imperfection as a Passive Resister, and then to try to perfect myself, for I believe that it is in India that the nearest approach to perfection is most possible.
Do you know of that article? - Yes, I have read it.
My Lords, it will be necessary for me to read another extract from Gandhi in order to lead on to some questions that I propose asking. It appears in a book, Satyagraha in South Africa, by Gandhi. I read from Satyagraha in South Africa, by M. K. Gandhi, published by the Navajivan Publishing House. The first edition was published in 1928, my Lord, and this is the revised second edition. I am reading from page 109:
None of us knew what name to give to our movement. I then used the term "passive resistance" in describing it. I did not quite understand the implications of "passive resistance" as I called it. I only knew that some new principle had come into being. As the struggle advanced, the phrase "passive resistance" gave rise to confusion and it appeared shameful to permit this great struggle to be known only by an English name. Again, that foreign phrase could hardly pass as current coin among the community. A small prize was therefore announced in Indian Opinion to be awarded to the reader who invented the best designation for our struggle.
I skip a few lines.
Shri Maganlal Gandhi was one of the competitors and he suggested the word "Sadagraha", meaning "firmness in a good cause". I liked the word, but it did not fully represent the whole idea I wished it to connote. I therefore corrected it to "Satyagraha". Truth (Satya) implies love, and firmness (agraha) engenders and therefore serves as a synonym for force. I thus began to call the Indian movement "Satyagraha", that is to say, the Force which is born of Truth and Love or non-violence, and gave up the use of the phrase "passive resistance", in connexion with it, so much so that even in English writing we often avoided it and used instead the word "Satyagraha" itself or some other equivalent English phrase. This then was the genesis of the movement which came to be known as Satyagraha, and of the word used as a designation for it. Before we proceed any further with our history we shall do well to grasp the differences between passive resistance and Satyagraha, which is the subject of our next chapter.
Chapter XIII
As the movement advanced, Englishmen too began to watch it with interest. Although the English newspapers in the Transvaal generally wrote in support of the Europeans and of the Black Act, they willingly published contributions by well-known Indians. They also published Indian representations to Government in full or at least a summary of these, sometimes sent their reporters to important meetings of the Indians, and when such was not the case, made room for the brief reports we sent them.
These amenities were of course very useful to the community, but by and by some leading Europeans came to take interest in the movement as it progressed. One of these was Mr. Hosken, one of the magnates of Johannesburg. He had always been free from colour prejudice but his interest in the Indian question deepened after the starting of Satyagraha. The Europeans of Germiston, which is something like a suburb of Johannesburg, expressed a desire to hear me. A meeting was held, and introducing me and the movement I stood for to the audience, Mr. Hosken observed, "The Transvaal Indians have had recourse to passive resistance when all other means of securing redress proved to be of no avail. They do not enjoy the franchise. Numerically, they are only a few. They are weak and have no arms. Therefore they have taken to passive resistance which is a weapon of the weak." These observations took me by surprise, and the speech which I was going to make took an altogether different complexion in consequence. In contradicting Mr. Hosken, I defined our passive resistance as "soul force". I saw at this meeting that a use of the phrase "passive resistance" was apt to give rise to terrible misunderstanding. I will try to distinguish between passive resistance and soul force by amplifying the argument which I made before that meeting so as make things clearer.
I have no idea when the phrase "passive resistance" was first used in English and by whom. But among the English people, whenever a small minority did not approve of some obnoxious piece of legislation, instead of rising in rebellion they took the passive or milder step of not submitting to the law and inviting the penalties of such non-submission upon their heads. When the British Parliament passed the Education Act some years ago, the Non-conformists offered passive resistance under the leadership of Dr. Clifford. The great movement of the English women for the vote was also known as passive resistance. It was in view of these two cases that Mr. Hosken described passive resistance as a weapon of the weak or the voteless. Dr. Clifford and his friends had the vote, but as they were in a minority in the Parliament, they could not prevent the passage of the Education Act. That is to say, they were weak in numbers. Not that they were averse to the use of arms for the attainment of their aims, but they had no hope of succeeding by force of arms. And in a well-regulated state, recourse to arms every now and then in order to secure popular rights would defeat its own purpose. Again some of the Non-conformists would generally object to taking up arms even if it was a practical proposition. The suffragists had no franchise rights. They were weak in numbers as well as in physical force. Thus their case lent colour to Mr. Hosken's observations. The suffragist movement did not eschew the use of physical force. Some suffragists fired buildings and even assaulted men. I do not think they ever intended to kill any one. But they did intend to thrash people when an opportunity occurred, and even thus to make things hot for them.
But brute force had absolutely no place in the Indian movement in any circumstance, and the reader will see, as we proceed, that no matter how badly they suffered, the Satyagrahis never used physical force, and that too although there were occasions when they were in a position to use it effectively. Again, although the Indians had no franchise and were weak, these considerations had nothing to do with the organisation of Satyagraha. This is not to say that the Indians would have taken to Satyagraha even if they had possessed arms or the franchise. Probably there would not have been any scope for Satyagraha if they had the franchise. If they had arms, the opposite party would have thought twice before antagonising them. One can therefore understand that people who possess arms would have fewer occasions for offering Satyagraha. My point is that I can definitely assert that in planning the Indian movement there never was the slightest thought given to the possibility or otherwise of offering armed resistance. Satyagraha is soul force pure and simple, and whenever and to whatever extent there is room for the use of arms or physical force or brute force, there and to that extent is there so much less possibility for soul force. These are purely antagonistic forces in my view, and I had full realisation of this antagonism even at the time of the advent of Satyagraha.
We will not stop here to consider whether these views are right or wrong. We are only concerned to note the distinction between passive resistance and Satyagraha, and we have seen that there is a great and fundamental difference between the two. If without understanding this, those who call themselves either passive resisters or Satyagrahis believe both to be one and the same thing, there would be injustice to both leading to untoward consequences. The result of our using the phrase "passive resistance" in South Africa was, not that people admired us by ascribing to us the bravery and the self-sacrifice of the suffragists but we were mistaken to be a danger to person and property which the suffragists were, and even a generous friend like Mr. Hosken imagined us to be weak. The power of suggestion is such, that a man at last becomes what he believes himself to be. If we continue to believe ourselves and let others believe, that we are weak and helpless and therefore offer passive resistance, our resistance would never make us strong, and at the earliest opportunity we would give up passive resistance as a weapon of the weak. On the other hand if we are Satyagrahis and offer Satyagraha believing ourselves to be strong, two clear consequences result from it. Fostering the idea of strength, we grow stronger and stronger every day. With the increase in our strength, our Satyagraha too becomes more effective and we would never be casting about for an opportunity to give it up. Again, while there is no scope for love in passive resistance, on the other hand not only has hatred no place in Satyagraha but is a positive breach of its ruling principle. While in passive resistance there is a scope for the use of arms when a suitable occasion arrives, in Satyagraha physical force is forbidden even in the most favourable circumstances. Passive resistance is often looked upon as a preparation for the use of force while Satyagraha can never be utilised as such. Passive resistance may be offered side by side with the use of arms. Satyagraha and brute force, being each a negation of the other, can never go together. Satyagraha may be offered to one's nearest and dearest; passive resistance can never be offered to them unless of course they have ceased to be dear and become an object of hatred to us. In passive resistance there is always present an idea of harassing the other party and there is a simultaneous readiness to undergo any hardships entailed upon us by such activity; while in Satyagraha there is not the remotest idea of injuring the opponent. Satyagraha postulates the conquest of the adversary by suffering in one's own person.
These are the distinctions between the two forces. But I do not wish to suggest that the merits, or if you like, the defects of passive resistance thus enumerated are to be seen in every movement which passes by that name. But it can be shown that these defects have been noticed in many cases of passive resistance. Jesus Christ indeed has been acclaimed as the prince of passive resisters but I submit in that case passive resistance must mean Satyagraha and Satyagraha alone. There are not many cases in history of passive resistance in that sense. One of these is that of the Doukhobors of Russia cited by Tolstoy. The phrase passive resistance was not employed to denote the patient suffering of oppression by thousands of devout Christians in the early days of Christianity. I would therefore class them as Satyagrahis. And if their conduct be described as passive resistance, passive resistance becomes synonymous with Satyagraha. It has been my object in the present chapter to show that Satyagraha is essentially different from what people generally mean in English by the phrase "passive resistance".
While enumerating the characteristics of passive resistance, I had to sound a note of warning in order to avoid injustice being done to those who had recourse to it. It is also necessary to point out that I do not claim for people calling themselves Satyagrahis all the merits which I have described as being characteristic of Satyagraha. I am not unaware of the fact that many a Satyagrahi so called is an utter stranger to them. Many suppose Satyagraha to be a weapon of the weak. Others have said that it is a preparation for armed resistance. But I must repeat once more that it has not been my object to describe Satyagrahis as they are but to set forth the implications of Satyagraha and the characteristics of Satyagrahis as they ought to be.
In a word, we had to invent a new term clearly to denote the movement of the Indians in the Transvaal and to prevent its being confused with passive resistance generally so called. I have tried to show in the present chapter the various principles which were then held to be a part and parcel of the connotation of that term.
That ends the chapter. Does the South African Indian Congress accept this as a method of struggle up to this date? - Yes, accept this as a method of struggle.
Does the SAIC accept passive resistance as a method of struggle up to this day? Satyagraha? - Yes.
Could you explain to the Court the difference between satyagraha as a creed to be applied to all problems of human life, and simply as a method of dealing with one particular problem? - My Lord, Mahatma Gandhi practised satyagraha as a creed, in that he observed this in all aspects of his life. While the struggle which we are conducting now and as it was conducted during the time of Mahatma Gandhi here in this country, as well as the struggle which was conducted under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi in India, was accepted by the organisation, that means the Indian Congress here and the Indian National Congress in India, as a method to achieve their aims through this non-violent form of struggle only. Apart from the struggle for the independence of India which Mahatma Gandhi carried on in India, he also practised his passive resistance movement through the various ashrams which he established throughout the country, where he wanted to bring about a change in outlook in the life of the people and lay a foundation for a life, whereby he would create a classless society. Now this, however, was not accepted by the organisation for achieving its aims. For the purpose of illustration we take in India the Indian National Congress: while striving for the liberation and freedom and for the independence of the country, the majority of the foremost and important leaders only accepted satyagraha or passive resistance for the achieving of those purposes. Similarly, we here too adopted this method of struggle in our organisation to achieve our aims through non-violence.
When you talk of India, did you say that the Indian National Congress did not accept it as a creed? - No.
What do you say about the South African Indian Congress? - I say that the South African Indian Congress has accepted this method for the attainment of its objectives as a political weapon. But the Congress has not accepted that as a creed as Mahatma Gandhi has accepted it.
Does that mean that in the South African Indian Congress, there may be people who refuse to use violence because they are against violence on principle, and there may also be people who refuse to use violence because the conditions are not suitable? - No, my Lord, there are people amongst the Indians who also believe in this as a creed, but the principle we have accepted in the Indian Congress is not to use violence at all in any form to achieve our aims, as they did in India.
Yes, I know. Is it possible that members of the South African Indian Congress have accepted this as a method of struggle? - Yes, My Lord.
Because they approach the matter in the same way as Gandhi has explained the people approach it - may approach it in England under the term passive resistance? - No. We will use the method of satyagraha as long as we strive for our rights, we will never use violence in our struggle. But apart from that in our practice generally it does not apply to us as it applied to Gandhi...
How does the South African Indian Congress visualise the changes will be brought about through its struggle? - By the struggle which was conducted in the past, and as it has been conducted by the Congresses, we believe that by suffering and by sacrifices as one undergoes, we will be able to convince the authorities, the electorate, to negotiate with us.
Is this hope of the South African Indian Congress based on any historical fact? - Yes, that is based on the fact that when this sort of struggle was conducted in this country, Acts were repealed, statutes were changed, new ones were put on the record for the benefit of the people.
Can you think of any example? - Act 2 of 1907 was changed.
Could you give us some recent example? When you were answering my last questions, were you referring to the evidence that you have already given where certain improvements were brought about as a result of the passive resistance struggle in the early days? - Yes, the independence of India was gained through that method. Very recently here, for instance, the bus boycott which was conducted in Johannesburg, and the people walked from Alexandra Township eleven miles and back every day, gained the support of the people and eventually negotiations came about and agreement was reached.
Over 50,000 Africans participated in a boycott of buses in Johannesburg which began on January 7, 1957, in protest against an increase in fares. It ended successfully after three months.
It has been suggested that when you get masses of people into action, other than voting at the ballot box, then you must expect that it is highly possible that violence will result. What, in the view of the SAIC is the likelihood of violence resulting from such action, passive resistance action? - As far as the people who are engaging in the struggle and people who follow the struggle, they will never use violence, and will never approve any violence whatsoever. But there may be other elements outside the movement, and they may create some sort of violence which we may not be responsible for. Then again, for some reason or other, even the authorities may have to take action and - where violence may be meted out, or even shooting takes place and blood may flow. But we would never use any violence against anyone.
Were there any instances of violence in India during the struggles conducted under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi? - Yes, practically every time when there was action taken in the form of defiance, for instance, there was violence at many places and at many stages, where the resisters in some cases were beaten, there were shootings which took place in many instances, and a lot of violence occurred and a lot of blood was shed. Even the different sections amongst the Indian people itself, for some reason or other fought amongst themselves violently. But as far as the Congress movement is concerned, that always remained non-violent.
In the event that violence arises during a struggle, would the SAIC abandon its policy? - No, not necessarily. We won`t be responsible - it won`t be our responsibility and we would never abandon the struggle.
What in the view of the South African Indian Congress would be the result of a policy of not using extra-parliamentary and sometimes unlawful forms of struggle? - The result would be to abandon our organisation, and accept the position as such.
What would happen to your grievances then? - Either it would go by default or some other sort of thing would be created by someone, but as far as we are concerned, the Congress will have to abandon, and we will be doing nothing.
In the view of the South African Indian Congress is there no middle road between the ballot box and the violent overthrow of the government? - We have no right to vote, and on the other hand we don`t believe in violence at all in achieving our aims, and therefore there is a middle road, and that is the middle road on which we are treading at present.
Did the South African Indian Congress regard the late General Smuts as an easy or a difficult man to deal with? - He was very hard and perhaps difficult in a way to deal with.
I want to refer to a copy of a letter said to be sent by General Smuts to Mahatma Gandhi on Mahatma Gandhi`s seventieth birthday. 2 This was an article contributed by General Smuts to a book edited by Sir S. Radhakrishnan in tribute to Mahatma Gandhi: Mahatma Gandhi: Essays and Reflections on his Life and Work Presented to him on his Seventieth Birthday, October 2, 1939. London: Allen and Unwin, 1939.
I want to quote from a book, Tyranny of Colour, on page 75. It is a book about the history of the Indian people in South Africa, written by P. S. Joshi. Do you know this book? - Yes.
"It was my fate to be the antagonist of a man for whom even then I had the highest respect... his activities at that time were very trying to me... His method was deliberately to break the law, and to organise his followers into a mass movement of passive resistance in disobedience to the law objected to. In both provinces a wild and disconcerting commotion was created, large numbers of Indians had to be imprisoned for lawless behaviour and Gandhi himself received - what no doubt he desired - a short period of rest and quiet in gaol. For him, everything went according to plan. For me the defender of law and order - there was the usual trying situation, the odium of carrying out a law which had not strong public support, and finally the discomfiture when the law had to be repealed. For him it was a successful coup. Nor was the personal touch wanting... In gaol he had prepared for me a very useful pair of sandals, which he presented to me when he was set free! I have worn these sandals for many a summer since then, even though I may feel that I am not worthy to stand in the shoes of so great a man!"
Does this sort of reaction in what you call the heart of the oppressor strengthen you in your hope that by this process your aims will be realised? - Yes.
When did Gandhi leave the Union? - In about 1914.
When was the SAIC formed? - In 1921.
What provincial bodies constitute the South African Indian Congress? - The Transvaal British Indian Association, the Natal Indian Congress and the Cape Indian Congress.
Was there any special reason why the South African Indian Congress should form in the year in which it was formed? - Yes, there was. After the war agitation again started against the Indians, and as a result of that the Indians of different provinces came together and formed this organisation. Also there was a commission appointed, an enquiry commission 3 The Asiatics Inquiry Commission, chaired by Sir Johannes Lange, 1920-21 , to make representations to that Commission as well, and practically for other purposes they thought fit that a central body should be formed then, and this organisation was formed.
Was any new legislation relating to compulsory segregation of Indians introduced in the early `twenties? - Yes, in 1924, Class Areas Bill was introduced, and if that became a law, then there would be passive resistance against it, but this Bill did not become law for the reason that the Smuts Government fell and this Bill was dropped. But again in 1926 the Government of General Hertzog introduced a Bill called Areas Reservation Bill, 4 The Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provision) Bill, 1926 and at that stage too the South African Indian Congress sent a deputation under the leadership of Dr. Abdurahman 5 Dr. Abdulla Abdurahman to India and as a result of that deputation - the deputation for representation to the Government of India - a delegation from the Government of India was able to come to this country, and the Indian delegation and the Government of South Africa entered into an agreement called the Cape Town Agreement of 1927...
In terms of this Agreement, what happened to the Areas Reservation Bill which was then before Parliament? - The Government dropped the Bill in terms of this Agreement.
Was agreement reached in connexion with the assisted emigration of Indians from South Africa? - Yes, under Clause 3 of this Agreement.
Could you enlarge on that? - Indians who desire to leave this country would be assisted financially to a certain extent by this Government, and on reaching India, India undertook to see to their welfare... That was one of the points of the Agreement.
Was it also in terms of this Agreement that the South African Government undertook to take all possible steps for the uplifting of every section of their permanent population to the full extent of their capacities and opportunities? - Yes, that is generally known as the Upliftment of Indian Community. A provision was made to the effect that the Indians, those who remained in this country, were accepted as permanent population and the Union Government declared its firm belief in the principle that it was the duty of the Government to devise ways and means to take all possible steps for the uplifting of all sections of their permanent population to the full extent of their capacity and opportunity.
Is it also true that as a result of this Agreement the Government of India appointed an Agent to South Africa? - Yes, that is so.
Did the South African Indian Congress attach any importance to this Cape Town Agreement? - They attached very great importance to this Agreement, all along and even now.
Do you remember if during the `thirties any negotiations took place between the Indian community and the Government? - In 1930 again a Bill was introduced in the House of Parliament and as a result of that representations were made and in terms of this Agreement, the Cape Town Agreement - it said there that the Government will review from time to time this Agreement - and another delegation (from India) came to this country when this Bill was before Parliament, and eventually it was altered to some extent and then the Bill was passed as an Act in 1932, known as the Asiatic Land Tenure Act. An undertaking was also given at the time that in terms of the Bill which was supposed to be passed, a Commission would be appointed, which was of course appointed, known as the Feetham Commission, and after long investigation, eventually in 1941, and in terms of that recommendation of that Commission, certain areas were released in proclaimed land for the occupation of Indians.
Now coming to the interim Act of 1939 to which you have already referred, when this Act was passed, were there new proposals for passive resistance? - Yes.
What steps were taken in this direction? - The Indian community decided in 1939 to launch a passive resistance movement, a meeting was held in July sometime, and the date was the 1st August, to launch a passive resistance movement against the Act.
Did the authorities do anything to prevent the Indian community from proceeding with the passive resistance campaign? - General Smuts got in touch with the British Government and the Government of India to ask Mahatma Gandhi to intervene in the matter, and the Government of India sent a special representative to see Mahatma Gandhi who was at Ahmedabad in those days... and from there he asked the Indian community here to postpone the passive resistance struggle for a brief period.
I want to refer again to a statement which is contained in Tyranny of Colour, page 260. The statement is said to have been made by Dr. Dadoo. Did he have anything to do with the proposed passive resistance at that time? - He was the leader appointed by the Indian community in the struggle...
Are you aware of a statement issued by Dr. Dadoo as a result of a message from Mahatma Gandhi? - Yes.
Was the statement issued by Dr. Dadoo on behalf of the Passive Resistance Council at the time? - Yes, I did serve on that Council at the time...
In a statement to the press suspending the passive resistance movement, Dr. Dadoo declared:
"Mahatma Gandhi has been our guide and mentor in all that the Passive Resistance Council has been doing in this matter. And we shall wholeheartedly await his advice; for we realise that his interest in the cause of the Indians in South Africa has not abated one whit, even though many years have elapsed since he left South Africa.
"I desire, however, to stress the fact that the Asiatics (Land and Trading) Act of 1939 aims at the virtual economic extinction of the Indian community of the Transvaal, and casts slur of inferiority on the whole Indian nation.
"The Passive Resistance Council sincerely hopes that the negotiations that are now proceeding will result in an honourable settlement."
Was that the statement issued by Dr. Dadoo? - Yes.
Did the outbreak of the last war in any way interfere with the plans for a large-scale passive resistance movement? - Yes, in September the war broke out and as a result of that the passive resistance was suspended and it was not embarked upon because of that.
In 1941, when the interim Act was renewed for a further two years, did any resistance take place? - Yes.
What was the nature of it? - Then it was a passive resistance, but in view of the fact that the war was on, a very limited form of resistance took place. The form was that a few stalls were set up in Johannesburg. The volunteers were very limited in number - there were ten or twelve - (they) sold goods without licences, and this sort of protest was carried on for about ten months and then it was suspended.
You have already, earlier in your evidence referred to the Asiatic Land Tenure Act of 1946. Did this Act give rise to widespread discontent amongst the Indian community? - Yes, very wide.
Were the grievances of the South African Indian community discussed at a conference of the South African Indian Congress? - Yes, the South African Indian Congress held in Cape Town in 1946.
Were you present at the conference? - Yes, I was present.
Mr. Kathrada, there is something I would like you to consider. I come back to the admissions made by Mr. Maisels on behalf of the defence, right at the outset, that the organisations mentioned by him worked together to overthrow the government or to change the government, - well, to work together to get a new government, I`ll put it that way. Now the question between the defence and the Crown is whether that was with or without violence, and/or whether the state was being aimed at. And bearing in mind the cross-examination Mr. Maisels conducted against Professor Murray, I would like you to consider the question to what extent it is relevant in view of the admissions, and in view of the issue between the Crown and the defence, to trace in this close detail the history of the Asiatic bills in South Africa, and the various forms of passive resistance. I don`t know whether I have made myself clear, but I would like you to consider that. If you think it is relevant, then you must carry on but the issue really between you and the Crown is violence. Now Mr. Maisels, in his cross-examination of Professor Murray, devoted some considerable time tracing the history of Union legislation and how it affected the various people. I would like you just to consider whether it is necessary for you to go into this close detail. You can take your time about it, but just think about it.
I would like to think about it, my Lord.
Did the conference appoint a deputation to see the Prime Minister? - Yes.
Were you a member of that deputation? - Yes.
Why did the deputation interview the Prime Minister? - We requested the Prime Minister not to proceed with the Bill which was before the Parliament at the time, and call a round table conference between the Governments of India and South Africa.
What was the outcome of the deputation? - General Smuts refused; he said that the Bill will become an Act and neither is he prepared to consult the Indian Government at that stage.
After consideration of the report of that deputation, did the South African Indian Congress Conference thereafter pass a resolution? - The outcome of this interview was reported to the Conference, and as a result of that a resolution was taken by the South African Indian Congress...
Will you quickly glance through this resolution of the South African Indian Congress held in Cape Town on the 12th February 1946? - Yes.
According to this resolution, one of the decisions taken was to send deputations from the South African Indian Congress to India, America and Britain? - That is correct.
And the other major decision taken by this Conference was to prepare the Indian community of South Africa for a passive resistance struggle, is that correct? - That is correct.
In pursuance of this resolution did deputations of the South African Indian Congress visit India, Britain and America? - That is correct.
What was the purpose of these deputations? - The purpose of the deputation which went to India was that they should interview the Government of India in order to bring about a round table conference between the South African Government and the Indian Government; failing a round table conference, if it is not accepted, then they will ask in terms of the resolution, the Government of India to withdraw the High Commissioner from this country, the High Commissioner for the Government of India, and to apply sanctions against South Africa. The South African Indian Congress (delegation) which went from here, on reaching India, immediately contacted Mahatma Gandhi, who drew up the memorandum, and the late Aga Khan was asked to lead the deputation to the Viceroy and a deputation was in fact led by Aga Khan, and representations were made in terms of this resolution. Furthermore the other purpose of the delegation was to enlighten the public of India on the position of the Indians of South Africa. Similarly the other two delegations which went to England and America, their purpose was also to enlighten the public opinion of Britain and America, as far as possible.
And further in pursuance of the resolution was a passive resistance movement started in South Africa? - This resolution also empowered the Congress to organise a passive resistance movement against the Act, and the provincial bodies, that means the Transvaal Indian Congress and the Natal Indian Congress, were asked by the South African Indian Congress to embark on planning of the passive resistance.
Did the Transvaal British Indian Association become the Transvaal Indian Congress? - That is right, my Lord, in 1927.
When did passive resistance begin? - The Transvaal and the Natal Indian Congresses formed Passive Resistance Councils, and these two Councils got together and a Joint Passive Resistance Council was formed and set up a date, I think in June of that year, to start passive resistance, and passive resistance was resumed from some date in June.
You told us you were a member of the Transvaal Passive Resistance Council? - Yes.
Did the Passive Resistance Council call for volunteers? - Yes.
What were these volunteers called upon to do? - These volunteers were called upon to defy a law and submit themselves to go to jail.
Could you give us a bit more detail? What actually did they defy? - The Passive Resistance Council decided that a certain portion of land should be occupied by the volunteers which would mean that they were violating the provisions of the Act, and therefore they selected only one place in Durban, which property belonged to the municipality, and tents were pitched up and people started occupying that land; as a result of that the resisters were arrested.
Have you any idea how many volunteers were imprisoned during that campaign? - Round about two thousand people.
Were they only Indians? - The large bulk of the resisters were Indian, but members from the other communities were accepted and they also defied. There were Europeans, there were Coloureds, there were some Africans who took part in this defiance movement as volunteers.
My Lords, I would like to read a few extracts from the report of the Joint Passive Resistance Council which deals with the setting up of the Passive Resistance Council, the course of the campaign, the hooliganism that took place at the lot, organisations that were set up amongst other communities to support the campaign, etc.
Is that relevant? If we know the principle that here was a campaign, there was a submission to arrest, so many people were arrested, how are the details of that particular campaign relevant?
Excepting My Lord that during the initial stages of the campaign there was great amount of provocation and actual violence inflicted on the resisters.
That may be relevant, and I suggest that you put the direct question, if it is within the knowledge of the witness, then you have got direct evidence. If the witness knows that of his own knowledge, he can speak about it.
I don't know if the witness was present at the actual scenes of violence...
Do you know of any scenes of violence which occurred at this place? - I knew, but I was not present, my Lord.
I take it you were on this Joint Passive Resistance Council, were you - Yes, I was.
And did you get reports in regard thereto? - Yes, my Lord...
You say that passive resistance actually started in June of 1946? - Yes.
Was it reported to the Joint Passive Resistance Council that acts of violence took place at the resistance plot? - Yes.
Who was responsible for these acts of violence, according to the report? - It was, according to the report, some hooligans, not the Indians. Hooligan elements which came to the plot, they burnt the tents, and even assaulted some of the resisters.
Was there any retaliation on the part of the volunteers? - No, none whatsoever, and it was seen that no fighting should occur, although there was a large crowd of Indians who were not resisters, and even they were all kept back and not to fight and make it a racial issue first of all, and secondly the resisters of course cannot indulge in violence at all. But even those who were not volunteers, they were also asked, and they obeyed the command, and no violence took place from the Indian side.
Did this violence continue for some days? - Yes.
To your knowledge, did the police intervene? Or was it reported to the Joint Passive Resistance Council? - Unless I see the report I won't remember all that.
According to the report, hooliganism began on the l6th of June ad continued until the 24th when the District Commandant of Police read a Proclamation under the Riotous Assemblies Act, prohibiting any gathering within five hundred yards of the intersection of Gale Street and Umbilo Road? - Yes.
Do you remember...
May I just interrupt here. After that, did the passive resisters still continue? - Yes.
The reading of the Riotous Assemblies Act, was that to stop hooliganism? - That is right.
And did it stop it? - The struggle went on, the rioting stopped.
The violence stopped? - Yes.
You mean the volunteers were still camping on the plot of land? - They were, and eventually an arrangement was arrived at with the authorities, that they would simply enter the area, their names would be taken down, and the following day they would appear in the Court.
Was that after the reading of the...? - After that.
After the reading, they didn't continue to stay on the plot in a group?
- No, they came back after that. They first left and then they came back, and then this sort of arrangement was arrived at.
They just gave their names, and then they would leave the plot? - They would leave the plot and the following day they would attend the Court, where they would be sentenced.
These hooligans, who were they? - Europeans.
Do you recall if during the Passive Resistance Campaign, any organisation was set up amongst Europeans in support of the campaign? - Yes, there was one in Durban, the Council of Human Rights, and one was in Johannesburg, the Council of Civil Rights 6 Council for Asiatic Rights, Johannesburg or something to that effect.
I am leaving the passive resistance movement. You will recall that at the general elections of 1948, the Nationalist Party came into power? - Yes.
Before you go on, what happened as a result of the deputations which went to India and Britain and America? What became of that? - They came back, and the Government of India withdrew the High Commissioner in terms of what the deputation asked the Government of India to do. There was no round table conference - the Government of South Africa did not accede to that - and as a result of that the High Commissioner was called back.
Was that before May of 1948? Was the High Commissioner withdrawn before 1948? - Yes, before the struggle started, and economic sanctions were applied against South Africa, that means they (India) stopped trading with South Africa. 7 On July 17, 1946, the Government of India prohibited trade with South Africa. It had earlier given notification of the termination of the trade agreement with South Africa, and recalled its High Commissioner from South Africa.
On June 22, 1946, it sent a letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations requesting that the question of the treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa be included in the provisional agenda of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
The deputations which went to England and America, they held quite a number of meetings, saw important people in Britain, and the one which went to America, they assisted the Indian delegation who took up this matter at the United Nations.
Prior to the Nationalist Party's return to power, did they publish or did it publish what it called its "Indian Policy"? - Yes, I believe so.
Was this so-called Indian policy printed in an election bulletin of the Nationalist Party called National News? - Yes.
Were extracts from the National News published in a newspaper called the Passive Resister? - Yes.
What newspaper was this Passive Resister? - The Passive Resister was a newspaper which was conducted by the Joint Passive Resistance Council for the Transvaal, giving the views and the news of the passive resistance.
I would like to hand you a photostat sheet from the Passive Resister... Do you recognise this to be a passage from the Passive Resister? - Yes.
Now I want to briefly read the six main points of what purports to be the Nationalist Party's Indian policy.
Was that to your knowledge the policy of the Nationalist Party before it came into power? - Yes...
Shortly after the election of the Nationalist Party to the Government, did the Passive Resistance Council take any decision in regard to the continuation of the passive resistance campaign? - Yes.. in May 1948 when the Smuts Government lost the election and the Nationalist Party formed the government, we discussed this matter in the Joint Passive Resistance Council and decided to suspend the struggle, because the United Party was actually responsible for the passing of the Act... and we in fact did suspend the struggle and immediately started communicating with the Minister, more particularly the Prime Minister, on the subject.
The Prime Minister referred your communication to the Minister of the Interior? - Yes, that is so.
And did the Congresses then receive a letter from Dr. Donges T. E. Donges, the Minister of the Interior who I believe was the Minister of the Interior at the time? - That is right.
My Lords, I have a further copy of the Passive Resister in which this letter was printed...
This will be Z. 15.
Now in reply to your first letter to the Prime Minister, was the following the letter that you received from Dr. Donges? 2 The following two letters were taken from Passive Resister, Johannesburg,
August 6, 1948. The letter from Dr. Donges was dated July 12, 1948. The Indian Congresses decided, at a meeting on July 31-August 1, 1948, on the subsequent letter to the Prime Minister.
Sir,
Your letter of the 4th ultimo to the Private Secretary to the Honourable Prime Minister has been referred to me by the Prime Minister.
I note the request of your two executive committees to the Prime Minister to meet a joint deputation to discuss certain difficulties in regard to the Asiatic Land Tenure and Indian Representation Act, 1946. As I am the responsible Minister, I shall regard the request for an interview as directed to me.
I am at all times prepared to discuss with Indians in South Africa in a friendly and cooperative spirit any matter affecting the interests of Indians here. But I am not prepared to extend this facility to any organisation of Indians which sponsors or associates itself with any organised flouting of the laws of the country. I also exclude organisations which are communistic in their orientation or leadership or which while claiming to be composed of Union citizens, invoke the political aid of another country. At the moment the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses do not fall within the ambit of organisations with which I am prepared to discuss, indeed with which I could usefully discuss, matters affecting the Indian population in the proper spirit. I note that your organisations have temporarily suspended organised law-breaking. While not prepared to judge the motives or reasons for this step, I can only hope that it will be followed within the near future by the permanent abrogation of organised law-breaking and the repudiation of foreign ideological conceptions which are inimical to the racial peace in South Africa. If my hopes are realised, the way will be paved for the desired interview on a mutually convenient date. Until then, other Indian organisations which satisfy the tests I have enunciated above, will have to serve as the channel through which the Indian population in South Africa may approach the Government for a discussion of any matter affecting its interests.
Yours faithfully,
(Signed) T. E. Donges
Minister of the Interior
Just below that appears the text of the reply sent to this letter by the Joint Passive Resistance Council of the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses.
Sir,
We are directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated 2nd July, 1948. It is the desire of the Transvaal and Natal Indian Congresses to make the following observations for the earnest consideration of the Honourable the Prime Minister.
However, before we could attend to this matter, the Honourable the Minister of the Interior has already, by letter dated the 12th July, 1948, expressed his unwillingness to meet our Congresses. He has raised objections which are to be greatly deplored, for they run counter to all constitutional and democratic practice. We view such an attitude with grave apprehension, more particularly when it is taken against the accredited national representatives of a community who, deprived of the Parliamentary franchise, has no other channel of placing its views before the Government.
Our Congresses, Sir, record with great regret the fact that the Honourable the Prime Minister has been unable to grant us an interview. He has referred us to the Honourable the Minister, who has refused to meet our organisations. The primary purpose envisaged by our Congresses in seeking the interview was to discover the policy of the new Government in respect of the following disabilities under which the Indians suffer:
What we require is an unequivocal statement of policy from the new Government in regard to the above matters, especially regarding our status as part of the South African nation. Such a declaration, we can seek only from the Honourable the Prime Minister, the head of the Government.
We hope, Sir, we have made our position clear. Should the Honourable the Prime Minister find it possible to grant us an interview, we shall readily wait on him at his early convenience. Should he not be able to do so, we anticipate an early statement on the above-mentioned matters that would appraise us on Government policy thereon.
Yours faithfully,
Y. A. Cachalia
Joint Secretary, Transvaal Indian Congress
D. Singh
General Secretary, Natal Indian Congress
Were these the texts of the correspondence which passed between your organisation and the authorities? - Yes.
You have already referred to the 1947 Report in which mention is made of the fact that the African National Congress sympathised with the present resistance struggle, and that Africans actually participated in the campaign? - That is correct.
Is it correct that in March or thereabouts in 1947, a meeting took place between representatives of the Natal Indian Congress, the Transvaal Indian Congress and the African National Congress?
Before you go on, what was the outcome of these letters? - There was no reply to this letter, My Lord; no policy was announced.
I see that in the letter from the Minister of the Interior there is a statement that he was not prepared to negotiate with organisations which are communistic in their orientation or leadership? - Yes.
Were there Communists as leaders of your organisation at the time? - I don`t know what this letter meant, but Dr. Dadoo 3 Dr. Yusuf M. Dadoo, then President of the Transvaal Indian Congress was a member of the Communist Party.
Was he President of the Indian Congress...? - Yes.
The South African Indian Congress? - No, the Transvaal Indian Congress.
Who was the President of the South African Indian Congress? - At that time, Mr. Ahmed Ismail.
Did the South African Indian Congress consist of the Natal Indian Congress, the Transvaal Indian Congress and the Cape Indian Congress? - Yes.
Were there other leaders of the Transvaal Indian Congress who were members of the Communist Party at that time? - No, I don`t think so. No officials were members of the Party.
I was asking you about a meeting between representatives of the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses, and the African National Congress. Did you know that such a meeting took place in 1947? - Yes.
Did you know who the representatives were who participated in this meeting? - Dr. Xuma, 4 Dr. A. B. Xuma the President of the African National Congress, Dr. Naicker, 5 Dr. G. M. Naicker the President of the Natal Indian Congress, and Dr. Dadoo, the President of the Transvaal Indian Congress, met.
Was a statement of policy issued after this meeting? - Yes.
What is the statement generally known as in Congress circles? - It is known as Xuma-Dadoo-Naicker Pact.
I want to refer to Passive Resister, Friday, March 14, 1947. There is an article headed "Non-European Unity Declaration". Is that the Dadoo-Naicker-Xuma Pact that you referred to? - That is correct.
I would like to read the text of this.
This Joint Meeting between the representatives of the African National Congress and the Natal and Transvaal Indian Congresses, having fully realised the urgency of cooperation between the Non-European peoples and other democratic forces for the attainment of basic human rights and full citizenship for all sections of the
South African people, has resolved that a Joint Declaration of cooperation is imperative for the working out of a practical basis of cooperation between the national organisations of the Non-European peoples.
This Joint Meeting declares its sincerest conviction that for the future progress, goodwill, good race relations, and for the building of a united, greater and free South Africa, full franchise rights must be extended to all sections of the South African people, and to this end this Joint Meeting pledges the fullest cooperation between the African and Indian peoples and appeals to all democratic and freedom-loving citizens of South Africa to support fully and cooperate in this struggle for:
Does this correctly set out the Dadoo-Xuma-Naicker Pact? - Yes.
In 1949 did rioting occur between Africans and Indians in Durban? - That is correct.
Did the African National Congress and the Indian Congresses adopt an attitude towards these riots? - Yes.
What was their attitude? - The attitude was to stop the rioting immediately.
I understand that the Congresses took certain specific steps to bring the rioting to an end? - That is correct.
What were these steps? - The President of the ANC Natal and the President of the Indian Congress of Natal made joint appeals to stop rioting, and bring about peace and better understanding amongst both sections of the people.
Did you personally visit Durban at that time? - Yes, the President-General of the African National Congress was in Johannesburg. I went with him specifically during the time of the riots to see that the rioters stopped.
Was it Dr. Xuma? - Yes.
Was there a Commission of Enquiry appointed after the riots? - Yes, there was.
And did the Congresses make joint representations to this Enquiry? - Yes, the Executive Committees of both the Congresses met in Durban and they decided at the time to make joint representations to the Commission, and they in fact made joint representation through advocates.
Is it correct that in 1949 6 This should be "1950". there was in addition cooperation between the African National Congress and the Transvaal Indian Congress, which resulted in the first joint major campaign by the two organisations? - Yes.
Did this campaign have anything to do with banning orders? - Yes.
On whom was the banning order imposed? - Dr. Dadoo, the President of the Transvaal Indian Congress, went to Cape on Congress work. Then he was served notice under the Riotous Assemblies Act banning him from attending gatherings and attending meetings. As a result of that the Transvaal Indian Congress and the Transvaal African National Congress met and decided to launch a protest against the banning, and they also decided to hold a Free Speech Convention. That was the decision taken, yes.
What was the purpose of this convention, do you remember? - On the question of freedom of speech, that people should not be banned, but that they should be allowed to propagate their convictions.
Did this convention take any decisions with regard to any form of action? - Yes. They decided also, as a means of protest, for a stoppage of work for one day, and the 1st of May was accepted for that purpose.
Did the Transvaal Indian Congress in fact take steps to implement this decision? - Yes.
What form did the demonstration as a whole take? - On the 1st of May there was stoppage of work in the Transvaal, more particularly on the Reef. The Indians, those who were working, they did not go to work; and those who had businesses, they closed their businesses, they closed their shops.
As far as the Congress was concerned, was it a peaceful demonstration? - Yes, certainly.
Did any disturbance occur on that date? - Yes, in the evening there were some shootings in Alexandra Township, in Benoni, and also at Orlando. Some lives were lost, I think about eighteen or twenty.
You say lives were lost. Who were these people who were killed? - The Africans were killed from the shooting of the police.
Were any policemen injured to your knowledge? - No, none.
Later on, in May, did a conference take place between representatives of the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress? - Yes, on the 14th of May.
What was the purpose of this conference? - The purpose of this conference was to protest and take some positive action against the bills which were before the Parliament, more particularly the Suppression of Communist Bill and the Group Areas Bill.
And did the conference decide on the nature of any such action to be taken? - Yes, it was decided that June 26th be proclaimed a day of protest against the two measures, as well as a day of mourning for those people who were killed on the 1st of May.
Was the date, the 26th June, fixed by any Congress official? - No, it was left to the President-General of the African National Congress, and Dr. Moroka, 7 Dr. J. S. Moroka, President-General of ANC from 1949 to 1952 the President-General of the African National Congress, fixed a date.
Now on the 26th June, 1950, was there in fact a stoppage of work? - Yes.
Was the stoppage restricted to any particular area? - No, this was a Union-wide stoppage of work.
Can you give any idea of the extent of the stoppage in the main centres? - I think it was just over 60 percent. The reports showed that there was over 60 percent success of the stoppage of work, taking all in all.
Sixty percent of which people stopped work? - All, that means the Indians, the Coloureds and the Africans. For instance, my Lord, if you take Natal, the bulk of the Indian population there who are workers stopped work in Durban.
This is 60 percent of the total population except the Whites? - That is right, of the non-Europeans.
We have referred yesterday and today to the conference of the South African Indian Congress held in 1950 in Johannesburg? - Yes.
We have also referred to a resolution passed at that conference on the need for cooperation between the Indian community and other communities? - That is so.
Up to the time of your banning, was there any amendment or any change made to this attitude, to the attitude expressed in that resolution? - Of cooperation?
Yes? - No.
Has this resolution, as far as you are concerned, been the guiding policy of Congress since its adoption? - Quite so.
My Lords, I am now proceeding to the Defiance Campaign. I wanted to start off by reading the letters which passed between the Congresses and the Government. Are you aware of a Joint Planning Council that was established in 1951 by the South African Indian Congress and the African National Congress? - Yes.
What was the purpose of this Joint Planning Council? - The purpose was to inquire and work out the details of how the defiance movement or the passive resistance could be launched.
Did the Joint Planning Council prepare a plan which was submitted to the African National Congress and to the South African Indian Congress? - Yes, that is so...
I would like you to have a look at the plan. My Lord, I am informed that our copy of the record is in the prison library, but I will continue, my Lord. How would you describe the nature of the method suggested in this plan? - The method was based on passive resistance lines, on the lines of passive resistance.
Does the plan bear any resemblance to the passive resistance campaign of 1946 conducted by the Transvaal and Natal Indian Congresses? - Yes, it was based on those lines.
... This is headed "Report of the Joint Planning Council of the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress". Now, Mr. Cachalia, does this Plan or was this Plan drawn up in connexion with the campaign for the Defiance of Unjust Laws? - That is so...
Well, it had better be typed in at this point of the record.
Yes, my Lord.