Molvi Cachalia, after qualifying as a priest how long did you actually fulfill your mission as a priest, and where? - My Lords, after qualifying as a Molvi I would say I did not go in for preaching or for the priesthood at all, and I may say that it is a common thing amongst the Muslims that there is no question of priesthood; it is not necessary, after qualifying, to go into preaching and so forth.
I don`t say it is necessary, but your career has really been that of a politician and a businessman. Is that correct? - That is right.
And in what business are you? - I am carrying on at present a mail order business; I carry on a business called "Central Distributing Agency" - it is a mail order business.
Throughout the country? - Mostly confined to Johannesburg.
And these letters that are sent to you when people order goods from you, do you have them translated into Urdu before you reply to them? - No, we have agents who bring in the orders.
I see, and you conduct your business in what language? - In English...
Mr. Cachalia, you have made a very detailed study of the Group Areas Act and all its ramifications, haven`t you? - I don`t know what very detailed means, but these are the problems which are faced by members of our people and we discuss them.
Yes and you have studied the Act, all the amendments? - Well, we have to go to lawyers and we do discuss with the lawyers, and try to understand from the Act as well.
Have you studied the Act? - Yes.
The English or the Afrikaans version? - I don`t know Afrikaans, but English I do read.
And you have read the judgments of the Court? - Yes.
And you are known amongst the Indian community as one of the experts on the Group Areas Act, are you not? - No, I don`t agree with that at all; I cannot be an expert.
And the Indian school that you attended, what languages did you learn in there? - Urdu, Gujarati and English.
And English? - Yes.
Now, Mr. Cachalia, you say that you were an Executive member of the South African Indian Congress for a number of years? - Yes.
Apart from that did you belong to any political organisations? - The Transvaal Indian Congress.
Yes, any others? - I don`t remember offhand.
What about the Peace Council? - Well, that is not a political organisation... It is a movement, a peace movement.
You were one of the people who started the Transvaal Peace Council in 1950, was it not? - Yes...
And in 1953 you participated in the establishment of the South African Peace Council? - Yes...
And you were elected at the first National Conference as one of the Vice Presidents of the Peace Council? - Yes, it is possible.
What do you mean it is possible; do you know that or don`t you know it? - I don`t remember unless I go into it, but it`s quite possible...
Have you a bad memory, Mr. Cachalia?...
Mr. Cachalia, were you not one of the Committee that really convened the first National Peace Conference? - I may have been on the Committee as well.
But were you not the chairman of that Committee, Mr. Cachalia? - No, I don`t think so. I did not take a very active part. I was the secretary of the Transvaal Peace Council. I think I must be reminded, my Lords... but I was in the peace movement, that is quite correct...
Now, Mr. Cachalia, you say the Peace Council is not a political organisation? - Not in the sense that we conduct our political struggles; it is confined to the peace of the world.
The peace of the world? - Yes.
And do you know what the Peace Council says, under what circumstances there will be peace in the world? - Yes.
Do you know that they support the liberatory struggles in the various countries, because with liberation peace will be achieved? - Yes, because these are the causes of friction; colonialism was the cause of the wars throughout the years, and peace movement is essentially interested in avoiding any bloodshed and war in the world.
So that in that sense the Peace Council supported liberatory struggles in various countries? - Yes, to bring about peace and avoid wars.
Now. Mr. Cachalia, you have spoken about Dr. Dadoo. You said he was a Communist, is that correct? - Yes.
And he became the President of the South African Indian Congress in 1952? - Correct.
Who was President prior to that? - Mr. Ahmed Ismail.
Was he a Communist too? - No.
What happened to him? - He is dead now.
No, in 1952. - In 1952 he was President of the South African Indian Congress.
And was Dr. Dadoo elected in his place? - Yes, the Constitution of the South African Indian Congress works in this manner, that the office rotates in different provinces. When Mr. Ismail was in Cape Town, the members from Cape Town were the officers of the Indian Congress; the office was there in those years. When it came to the Transvaal, when the turn of the Transvaal came, then the officials were elected in the Transvaal; then when it rotated to Natal, the officials were elected in Natal...
Now, Mr. Cachalia, the Indian Congress, together with the other Congress movements - the African National Congress, the South African Indian Congress, the South African Congress of Democrats, the South African Coloured People`s Organisation, and the South African Congress of Trade Unions - they were all in a liberatory struggle; do you know that? - Yes.
And they all worked together? - Yes...
Do you know of any divergence in policy between the various Indian Congresses in regard to the aims and objects of the liberatory struggle? - No, our objective is only one and that is laid down in the policy - that we wanted to achieve our rights, and for that purpose we pursued our struggle.
Now, do you know of any divergence as to the objects, whatever they may be, between them - the Natal Indian Congress, the Transvaal Indian Congress, the South African Indian Congress and the various youth organisations? - As far as the Transvaal Indian Youth Congress is concerned they are not part of the Indian Congress as such; it is an independent organisation. As far as the provincial organisations are concerned, which are affiliated to the South African Indian Congress, they have their own organisations - these organisations are independent, although they are affiliated to the South African Indian Congress... One would put it on a federal basis...
We know they are organised on a federal basis, do you know whether there was any divergence in the aims and objects that they pursued in the liberatory struggle? - As far as the South African Indian Congress was concerned, no; they all had the same objective.
Is there any difference as to the methods to be employed in achieving these objects? - No, it is the same object we have.
And the same methods? - Yes.
Now, Mr. Cachalia, apart from Dr. Dadoo, do you know of other Communists in the Indian Congress movement? - In the Transvaal?
Yes. - Yes, there is one Mr. Thandray, and Mr. Kathrada was a member of the Communist Party I suppose.
What do you mean you suppose? - Well, I didn`t see him in the Communist Party, I really don`t know...
Did he have that reputation? - I heard that he was a member of the Communist Party, but apart from that I don`t know. And I don`t think any others, if there are others, I don`t know.
And in Natal? - Yes, in Natal I think Dawood Seedat was a member of the Party; I think Singh was a member of the Party; one of the Naickers was a member of the Party - M.P. Naicker, I think.
Now see this exhibit which you handed in yesterday, Z.15, this letter to the Government, where you give Dr. Donges` letter and the reply of the Joint Council to that. Dr. Donges referred to Communists in your organisation, and I see that the letter to Dr. Malan is signed by D. Singh, General Secretary of the Natal Indian Congress, 1948 - now that would be Singh the Communist? - May be, yes, I think he was a Communist Party member.
That is the one you said a moment ago was a Communist? - That`s right.
And he was General Secretary of the Natal Indian Congress? - Yes.
In 1948? - Yes.
Do you know whether Faried Adams was a Communist? - I don`t know, I don`t think he was a Communist Party member. I have never known about that.
What about Billy Nair from Natal, do you know him? - I don`t know him very well.
Paul Joseph, do you know him? - Yes.
What position did he occupy in the Congress movement? - He wasn`t any official of the Transvaal Indian Congress, I don`t think so.
Do you know if he was a Communist? - I don`t think he was a Communist.
Now, Dr. Dadoo who became your President in 1952, do you know his political career before that time? - My Lords, Dr. Dadoo, I know him from childhood. We were at school together and we were classmates.
He was a very prominent Communist, was he not? - He may have been but as far as our Congress activities were concerned he accepted our line, that is the line of passive resistance, in the movement.
I am not asking you that for the moment. He was a prominent Communist, was he not? - He was a member of the Communist Party, yes.
And do you know he was one of the people who was involved in 1946 miners` strike? - Well, I was not here at that time. I was in India when the strike actually took place.
I see. While on that point, you spent quite some time overseas, not so, from time to time? - India, yes.
Now, you were there in 1946? - Yes.
For how long? - I think three months.
And after that? - I was again there in India in 1950.
For how long? - For about one year...
And after that? - In 1955.
Was that when you went to Bandung? - Yes.
Then you stayed there? - For about a year.
You`ve given some evidence on the satyagraha and Gandhi`s philosophy. Have you made a study of that, Mr. Cachalia? - Yes, the study of the movement which went on here and the way the struggle went on in India.
Have you read any books? - Yes, I`ve read some of Gandhi`s books, but some years ago when I was studying, just before 1930...
Now give me the names of the books you read. - I read My Experiments with Truth and Satyagraha in South Africa, and some of the books during the struggle of 1940...
What is the name of that book? - I don`t remember but that was based on his articles and so on in 1940 during the war.
You know what Gandhi says about the Communists... not about Communism but about Communists? - I don`t know.
You wouldn`t know? - No.
Would you accept that Gandhi said the following about Communists: "The Communists seem to have made trouble-shooting their profession; I have friends among them, some of them are like sons to me, but it seems they do not make any distinction between fair and foul, truth and falsehood. They deny the charge. But their reported acts seem to sustain it." Would you accept that Gandhi said that? - Yes, but I don`t know on what occasion this was said, and for what purpose.
He said it in reply to a question, "How can we counteract the activities of Communists, who are openly opposing Congress?" You know Gandhi`s books; people put questions to him and then he replies to them? - Yes.
Now this question was asked about the Communists and he said: Communists are people who don`t distinguish between fair and foul, and truth and falsehood. - There must be some question on what basis Mahatma came to that conclusion. That is what I want to know.
What book did you refer to?
Towards Non-violent Socialism, by M.K. Gandhi, page 159, my Lord...
Whether it is in this book or not, would you accept that that would be the attitude of Gandhi towards Communists? - No, because there may have been some specific question on which this sort of thing might have arisen. Otherwise, what I know is that he worked in the Indian National Congress with the Communists who were also members of the All India Congress Committee and I know that Dr. Ashraf
Dr. K. M. Ashraf and such people were members of the Indian National Congress who were fighting for the liberation of India, and they were fighting side by side through the same organisation.
Could a Communist be a satyagrahi in the sense that Gandhi understood it? - You see, when they work through an organisation, and if that organisation accepts certain principles, or certain methods of struggle, and as long as the members - he may be a Communist or whatever he may be - as long as he abides by the principles in struggling, and in pursuing the movement, then we accept that position, and similarly, in India his policy was one of non-violence and through that the Communists worked and they were accepted as such.
Mr. Cachalia, that was not my question to you. My question to you was whether a Communist could be a satyagrahi in the sense that Gandhi used that expression? - That is how the Communists who work in the Indian National Congress worked, and the Congress accepted the position.
You are not replying to the question, Mr. Cachalia. Could a Communist be a satyagrahi in the sense that Gandhi understood that term? - My Lords, the Communist when he accepts the policy and works on that policy for whatever period he is a satyagrahi.
Mr. Cachalia, the basis of the doctrine of satyagraha is spiritual force and a belief in God, is it not? - Quite, no, not necessarily a belief in God, because in Hindu philosophy for instance there are people who don`t believe in God and yet they are satyagrahis.
Mr. Cachalia, Gandhi said that they could never really become true satyagrahis unless they accepted spiritual forces as the leading motive of their lives? - That is correct.
Yes, and the Communist believes in materialism? - Yes.
And they are against religion, is not that correct? - I agree, my Lords, but amongst the Hindus too there are those who don`t believe in God and yet they are satyagrahis if they accept the method.
I want to put it to you, Mr. Cachalia, that from Gandhi`s point of view, either you accepted satyagraha as a creed or? - No, not as a creed.
You were not really a satyagrahi? - No, my Lords, I can`t accept that position because I want to demonstrate a little...
The question is whether from Gandhi`s point of view, a satyagrahi is the person who accepts Gandhi`s creed? - My Lords, I will give some examples. For instance Pandit Nehru, the present Prime Minister of India, he is the political heir of Mahatma Gandhi. Pandit Nehru as far as I know, does not believe in God and yet he worked on the basis of non-violence as a policy, out and out; again there were other people in the Congress - for instance Maulana Azad, who was President of the Indian National Congress for a very long time during the war years; he did not agree with Mahatma Gandhi on the creed of satyagraha but he accepted the policy for achieving independence of India through non-violence, or through satyagraha - he was working with Mahatma Gandhi on the top rank. Again, there was Vallabhbhai Patel who was very near and dear to Mahatma Gandhi and yet he did not believe in satyagraha as a creed, but he believed in satyagraha as a weapon to achieve their independence. And of the people who were on the Working Committee, on the top, of the Indian National Congress were two persons whom I know, like the President of the Indian Republic, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, who believed in satyagraha as a creed, as Mahatma Gandhi believed, and there was another gentleman, Abdul Ghaffar Khan who was commonly known as Gandhi of the Frontier Province, and he also believed in satyagraha as a creed. Otherwise the majority of the Working Committee members, and the All India Congress Committee members, did not believe in satyagraha as a creed.
Now, you know this autobiography Nehru? - Yes.
Towards Freedom? - Yes.
You know this book? - Yes.
It is the autobiography of Nehru. - Yes, I`ve read that some years ago...
Now, page 82, referring to the creed of Gandhi, he says: "We were moved by these arguments, but for us and for the National Congress as a whole the non-violent method was not, and could not be, a religion or an unchallengeable creed or dogma. It could only be a policy and a method promising certain results, and by those results it would have to be finally judged." - Yes, that is what I was trying to convey.
So that it was just one - this non-violence as the mass of the Indians accepted it, not being a creed, to them it was just a tactic - a political method to achieve a certain end, is that correct? - As far as the policy of the Indian National Congress was concerned, yes.
And the South African Indian Congress in South Africa, the Congress movement as a whole, to them this non-violence and passive resistance was merely a political tactic? - No, my Lords, as the Indian National Congress believed in the non-violent struggle as a method, and through which they achieved their independence eventually in 1947, similarly we have adopted that tactic of satyagraha in our organisation - that is, the South African Indian Congress.
You call it satyagraha but it is just a political method to achieve a certain end, as far as your organisation is concerned? - It is more than that. As the Indian National Congress has accepted the method, similarly we have also accepted that as a method here, but then there are people who may not believe in the life as a creed. There may be members in the Indian Congress here who may believe in satyagraha as a creed; for instance, Mr. Nana Sita who was President of the Transvaal Indian Congress after Dr. Dadoo resigned, he believed in satyagraha as a creed. He tried to put into effect non-violence through all aspects of life.
But to the organisation, your organisation, the Indian Congress, it was merely a method? - Yes, a method just as it was adopted by the Indian National Congress in India.
And I want to put it to you, Mr. Cachalia, that there is a very big difference between non-violence as a method and satyagraha as a creed preached and propagated by Gandhi? - My Lords, I think I will still have to explain the position. In India Mahatma Gandhi believed in satyagraha as a creed, whereas the Indian National Congress and the vast majority of the people in the National Congress who adopted satyagraha as a method to achieve India`s freedom only believed in the method of satyagraha for the purposes of achieving their independence, unlike Mahatma Gandhi and some of his followers who believed in satyagraha and who applied satyagraha as a creed throughout all their activities and in their life; that is the difference, my Lords. And similarly, as the Indian National Congress accepted the position, we in South Africa, the South African Indian Congress, accepted on a similar basis - that means that until we achieve our aims here we are not going to accept the position of violence in any shape or form...
Now, Mr. Cachalia, yesterday you read into the record what the requirements were for a real satyagraha; is that correct? - Quite so.
Now, these requirements which you read in yesterday, were they now the satyagraha as Gandhi understood it, or was that the requisites that the Indian Congress really demanded from true fighters on this non-violent basis? - Yes, my Lords, in our political movement we must abide by that insofar as violence does not occur. And we hope to achieve our aims through that non-violent method.
And by getting men to comply with those requisites to take part in your campaigns? - Yes, my Lords...
Mr. Cachalia, the passage that was read to you on theory and practice of passive resistance that was typed into the record, you remember the article? - Yes.
From Z.17? - Yes.
Now, what is this? Does this give one the creed or does this give one the qualities that a person should have if he applies the method only? - It gives both, my Lords; how it could be applied in political life and how it could be applied in life generally; one has to apply that from childhood.
Now what I want to know is this: I have some difficulty, you read an article like this and you say this is satyagraha. Now what in this article did the Congress movement accept and what did it reject? - You see, the Congress movement, when they applied satyagraha in a political programme - then that is confined to that programme only, and in that one is debarred from using any violence, and while the programme is applied of satyagraha we must not think in terms of violence at all.
So anybody who says "I wage a non-violent campaign" and who doesn`t want to achieve his aims by means of violence, would he conform to what the Congress required of a satyagrahi? - That is right. That is how it is, yes...
...Gandhi says a Communist - someone who does not believe in God - cannot be a true satyagrahi. 2 Gandhi, M. K. Satyagraha (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1951), page 364
Do you accept that? - But Gandhi worked, or his Congress worked, out and out with all these sort of people in the movement...
...I want you to reply to this question; I will give you the book and you can have a look at it. Do you challenge that is Gandhi`s view as to what a true satyagrahi is? - You see, there is a difference; the satyagraha as applied throughout the life of a person in every respect, and satyagraha as it applies in a political movement, to achieve certain aims. That is the difference I wanted to make.
Yes, you are repeating the difference as between a man who believes in it as a creed and one who uses it as a policy, as a means to achieve the aims...? - Yes, that`s right, my Lord, and that is how Gandhi himself carried on the struggle; that is what I wanted to convey.
Yes, but a true satyagrahi, as a true believer in this creed, would the stay of God be necessary? - One accepts the aspect of satyagraha in certain policy - then it is not necessary. That is what I wanted to say. But as a creed for life, yes...
Mr. Cachalia, I am going to put it to you - I will be dealing with it - that you and your Indian Congress have made a mockery of satyagraha; you have used Gandhi to protect yourselves behind the so-called non-violence; you have used and abused Gandhi and his theories for your own political purposes? - I totally disagree with that statement, my Lords; we have stood for it, we have given our lives for it and we are still standing on that basis...
Who were the members of the National Action Council of the African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress in 1952? Who represented the two Congresses on that coordinating body? - It was...
The National Action Council who organised the Defiance Campaign? - From the African National Congress it was the President-General of the African National Congress, Dr. Moroka, as far as I remember; it was Mr. Mandela...
Is that accused No. 6? - Yes, Mr. Nelson Mandela; Mr. Walter Sisulu...
Is that the accused? - Yes. Mr. Oliver Tambo.
Was he later Secretary-General of the African National Congress? - That is right. Y. A. Cachalia, that is my brother.
What was his position in the Indian Congress? - He was the Secretary of the South African Indian Congress. Dr. Naicker - no, myself, and yes, I think Dr. Naicker.
From Durban? G. M. Naicker? - I think so, yes. And Nana Sita - I don`t know, but one of the Congress Presidents...
Now you were Deputy Volunteer-in-Chief, the National Volunteer-in-Chief? - Yes.
Who was the Chief Volunteer-in-Chief? - Mr. Nelson Mandela.
Nelson Mandela? - Yes.
Was he for both organisations? - Well, we represented our organisation, the Indian side, and the African National Congress represented the other side.
Now, in selecting your first group of volunteers you say you applied a screening process? - Yes.
You went into a man`s background and his religious beliefs, and his suitability. Now, on that basis, Mr. Cachalia, the first volunteers that you elected for duty were all Communists? - The first - no, Mr. Nana Sita was there and he was leading the batch; he was the leader of the batch if I remember correctly.
Your minutes say "First volunteers to go into action were the Communists". Dr. Dadoo, was he one of the first? - Oh, I see...
Was Dr. Dadoo one of the first? - No. Immediately the defiance started the volunteers who were enrolled - the first batch was led by Nana Sita. But prior to that, when certain people were banned under the Suppression of Communism Act - those were the Presidents of the various organisations, that is, Mr. Marks who was the President of the Transvaal African National Congress, and Dr. Dadoo who was the President of the South African Indian Congress, and Mr. Kotane who was the executive member of the African National Congress - they defied first... 3 In May 1952, the Government served banning orders on five leaders of the Congresses ordering them to resign from the organisations and prohibiting them from attending gatherings: Moses Kotane, member of the national executive committee of the ANC; Dr. Yusuf M. Dadoo, President of SAIC; J. B. Marks, President of the Transvaal ANC; D. W. Bopape, secretary of the Transvaal ANC; and Johnston Ngwevela, chairman of the Cape Western regional committee of ANC.
They defied the orders in June, before the launching of the DEefiance Campaign, and were arrested.
I am referring to the Secretarial Report in A. 83 at page 8. It deals with the meeting of the Congress at Port Elizabeth and minutes say that the two Congresses accepted Dr. Y. M. Dadoo, President of the South African Indian Congress, M. Kotane, J. B. Marks, D. W. Bopape and J. N. Ngwevela as the first volunteers in the Defiance Campaign? - That is correct, but that was not on the basis of those volunteers which I was talking about, the volunteers who were first enrolled. These were the officials who were banned, and the organisation thought that because the officials were banned they should be the first to take action; and that is how these four or five people came to take action.
Were they the first volunteers? - They were the first, yes.
The first to defy? - Yes, but these people were not recorded on our volunteers list...
Did they have the requirements that a true volunteer must have? - Yes.
Yes; Dr. Dadoo? - Yes.
A Communist? - Yes.
Marks, a Communist? - Yes.
Bopape, a Communist? - Yes. They undertook to follow the policy of non-violence.
And their religious background, and their political background, and their inherent qualities - the Communists - those were the people who were chosen to be the first batch of volunteers? - In our movement we are concerned with the peaceful policy of non-violence, and therefore when we accepted one we accepted him on that basis. Now Dr. Dadoo had a long political background; he was elected leader by the Indian community in 1939 to lead the passive resistance movement, and therefore we were convinced all along - during our discussions and so on - that he was not the person who was going to harm the struggle of the people who had elected him as leader, and therefore we were quite justified in electing him and these others.
Mr. Cachalia, do you know anything about Communism? - Very little.
Very little? - Yes.
You haven`t studied it? - No, I know very little about it.
Do you know the Communist attitude to violence? - Well, it depends, you see for instance, when they work in our movement, they must give us an undertaking that they will not resort to violence, and will abide by our peaceful methods. If that is agreed to, and if we are satisfied then we will accept them as such.
Mr. Cachalia, why do you ask Communists to assure you that they will not resort to violence? - We ask anybody who comes into the movement; we have to be satisfied about that.
Do you know that Communists believe that they must work for the overthrow of the state by violence, and the establishment of a Communist state in its place - do you know that? - I don`t know. They may have that idea, but it may change in different circumstances and so on...
And if they don`t change? - If they don`t change it is not my quarrel with them - but when we deal with them individually, not as members of the Communist Party, it is on behalf of our organisation... They don`t come into the organisation with their Communistic policies which would be definitely rejected; that they cannot pursue in our organisation...
In those five instances you were not really concerned about their beliefs, and their politics and their background and so on? - No... when we selected volunteers - for instance when Mr. Kathrada who is also a Communist was accepted as a volunteer, we accepted him because we knew he would accept our policy of non-violence... If we were in doubt we would have put him aside.
Can you by way of example refer to any person who was appointed a volunteer only after he had been screened? - Yes, my Lord. The method which we adopted was this: we had a form on which the full name, address, a man`s political belief, his religious belief, his education, his work - where he worked previously over the past couple of years - and all these sort of things were all mentioned on that form. From that then it was easy for us to find out his background. We would also know then what Church or religion his parents belonged to. Then if we accepted him we would give him a code and tell him that this is our code by which he has to abide. He reads that and if he is satisfied then he has to sign a pledge...
Just a minute; can you remember the wording of the code, not the actual words but the effect of it? - Yes, my Lord; the effect of the code was something to the effect that he would have to carry out the non-violent method of struggle; he would not use violence in any form; he would not be provoked - and some such things.
Then he had to sign a pledge? - Then he had to sign a pledge.
To that effect? - To that effect.
Now, Dr. Dadoo was also a member of the Passive Resistance Council, is that correct? - Yes.
Who were the other members? - I am talking now of 1947. Mr. T. N. Naidoo and Mr. Nana Sita, Dr. Dadoo, myself, and my brother was there...
Y. A. Cachalia? - Yes, those were for the Transvaal...
And from Natal? - I don`t know all the names but Dr. Naicker was there, Mr. A. I. Meer was there, Debi Singh was there - a gentleman by the name of Dudoo (?) was there; as far as I remember they were the people who were there.
Now, you know the Communist Party was banned in 1950? - Quite, yes.
The people who belonged to the Communist Party, and also to the Indian Congress before 1950 - take a man like Dr. Dadoo for instance - why would he belong to both? Was there any difference in the aims and objects of the two political parties, do you know? - Well, a person may belong to many organisations; for instance, I belong to an organisation called Jamait-ul-Ulema-e-Transvaal...
We are talking of political parties? - Well, in India and here, too, for instance - well, here very little but in India - the Jamait-ul-Ulema-e-Hind was a political organisation... and it worked on the same lines - and we formed this organisation here as well. And I belonged to that organisation too, and at the same time I belonged to the Congress movement as well.
Are the objects the same? - Well, this has something to do with religion...
Yes, well, I am talking of purely political parties? - And at the same time they have a political programme as well.
The Communist Party in South Africa was a political party, was it not? - I agree.
And the Indian Congress was a political party too? - Yes.
Was there any difference between the two? - You see, Mr. Trengove, although Congress is a Congress, one must make a distinction, that it is not a party strictly speaking; it is an organisation for liberation. For instance, I will give you an example again. In India the National Congress which was struggling for the independence of India had the members of various political parties in India, for instance the Socialist Party was represented, the Communist Party members were represented there. Then there was Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Hind as I mentioned - that was also represented in the Congress. Then there was another organisation that was completely non-violent in character which was led by Abdul Ghaffar Khan in north India, and his organisation was known as Khudai Khidmatgar, and they were also represented in the Congress. Similarly, here in the Congress we had people of all views in our movement. So it is not strictly speaking a party - like for instance the Liberal Party here, or the Labour Party, or the Nationalist Party, all of which have fixed aims. It is not on that basis...
Now, Mr. Kathrada, accused No. 3, was he a volunteer, a defiance volunteer in the Defiance Campaign? - Yes.
Was he screened? - Yes.
He was found fit? - Yes.
According to his background and his religious beliefs? - Well, he was a Communist and apart from that I know the family very well; in fact his father was a partner with my father too some years ago - perhaps he doesn`t know - and his uncle is one of the...
Yes, you know his family well? - Yes.
And although he was a Communist you thought he was suitable? - Yes, he would abide by our organisation`s decisions.
Have you any reason to believe that he didn`t know what the South African Indian Congress policy was? - No, he knew it.
He knew it? - Yes.
And your association with him - would he be the type of Congress executive who would in his speeches and in his actions propagate Congress policy? _ Through Congress platforms?
Yes, Congress platforms. - Of course he would.
Mr. Cachalia, the African National Congress in their liberatory struggle had the unqualified support of the Indian Congress movement, is that correct? - We worked in alliance with them on an equal basis.
But the documents say that the South African Indian Congress movement throughout this period, 1952 to 1956, unconditionally, without any qualification, supported the African National Congress in its liberatory struggle? - Yes, and we were convinced that they, too, had the programme, for instance in 1949 - they passed a resolution to the effect that they would not collaborate, and that they would call upon the Native Representative Council and the Advisory Boards to resign - and some such things, and that was based on the non-violent policy. We had very thorough discussions with them and we were satisfied that they also intended carrying on their struggle on the non-violent basis. Therefore they naturally had the unqualified support of the Indian Congress.
You mentioned discussions with them; did you have full discussions with them? - Yes.
Can you recall when this took place? - As a result of that, in 1947, an agreement was entered into - it was read yesterday - between our President and Dr. Xuma.
Was the question of violence and non-violence discussed at that time? - Yes.
And on what lines did the discussion go? - Well, eventually it resulted in this document which was submitted yesterday, on cooperation, and we were satisfied that they had a programme of non-violence, too, in their struggle.
Who acted on behalf of the Indian Congress? - The Presidents; it was left to them.
Were you present at those discussions? - No, it was reported.
You say that was in 1947? - 1947, yes.
Do you know that in 1947 the African National Congress still believed in deputations and negotiations with the Government, is that so? - We still believe even today...
I am talking about the African National Congress? - We all believe, even now today, we want to carry out our objectives through negotiation - there is no other way.
Do you know that in 1949 the African National Congress made a fundamental change in the nature of their political struggle? - What change?
I want to know whether you know? - No fundamental change took place. The question of negotiation still holds today. The change was that now they had to take a stand to oppose - if negotiation did not come about they will have to struggle; that was the change that was brought about.
Mr. Cachalia, do you say that there was no fundamental change in the form of struggle in ANC policy before 1949, and after 1949? - The fundamental change I suppose was that now they were prepared to wage struggle - it came to that stage. That was the only change I know of. I don`t know if that was a fundamental change or not. But they wanted to pursue their struggle and get their rights - and now they had to wage a struggle.
And before 1949? - Before 1949 they were still trying to make representation. I don`t recollect very well, but before, too, they had to take some positive action, I understand, on the passes and so on.
Before 1949? - Long before that, yes. I don`t know the dates - I am not very conversant with it, I have read about it - but they did that. Women led a movement at the time - a woman who led the movement told me about it, how she led the movement, she told me about it - that was about 1938 or 1940 I think.
Where do you get your information as to what ANC is? - We also know about the policy of the Nationalist Party although we don`talk...
I am not talking about...? - And yet we have no direct contact with them...
Don`t evade the question, Mr. Cachalia, I am not talking about that...? - On the question of fundamental change, I am relating my experiences, but your question now is "where do you know the ANC policy from", from that point of view I am replying...
But I want to know: you didn`t make an ally of the United Party; you didn`t make an ally of the Nationalist Party; you made an ally of the African National Congress. - Yes.
Now, where do you get your information as to what their policy is? - Since we made allies with them we discussed it in the joint committee.
You had discussions in joint committee? - Yes.
They sent you their annual reports? - They also sent annual reports.
They sent fraternal delegates to conferences? - Yes.
Your people appeared on ANC platforms? - Yes.
In joint campaign? - Yes, in some cases, if we are invited.
You had joint coordinating committees where common campaigns were discussed and views were discussed? - Quite.
Yes; so at all times you people were kept fully informed as to what African National Congress policy was? - Yes.
I want to put it to you that the fundamental change in African National Congress policy is that in 1949 they abandoned negotiation and representation as being ineffective, and they drew up another Programme of Action in 1949 which became the basis of their liberatory struggle? - No, my Lords, it is not the question of abandoning the programme of negotiation; it is an advancement from that to a positive form of struggle or protest, and part of the negotiations still remains - that part of it still remains...
Now, Mr. Cachalia, I want to deal shortly with the activities of the Congress movement from about 1952? - Yes.
The Indian Congresses held annual conferences, is that correct? - The South African Indian Congress?
No, the Provincial Congresses; the Transvaal Indian Congress and the Natal Indian Congress. - I think the Natal Indian Congress did. We did not hold annual conferences, but we used to have working committees and sometimes conferences.
Yes; and at these conferences these agenda books were prepared before the time, is that correct? - Yes.
Secretarial reports were prepared? - Yes.
That was discussed by the Secretariat before the time? - Yes. And the Executive too.
Yes. And before it was actually submitted to the Congress it was approved by the Executive? - It was generally discussed in the Transvaal Indian Congress. As far as the South African Indian Congress was concerned, I think the Secretary used to prepare these.
Yes. - It didn`t go to the Executive meetings.
And the agenda book also had the speeches of the Presidents? - Quite correct.
It was also prepared beforehand? - Yes, the President would do that.
And then it had the minutes of the Congress? - Quite.
The previous minutes? - Yes.
And these were all bound together in these agenda books? - Yes.
And they were then submitted to Congress for approval? - For conference.
To conference for approval? - Well, the President`s Address for instance was usually read in the conference; the minutes were approved; the secretary`s report would be read; and that was discussed, of course, at the conference.
And it is either accepted or rejected by the conference? - Well, either some part was rejected and so on...
Were you ever present when any part of the secretarial report was rejected? Do you know of any case where the report was rejected? - I don`t recollect where this happened...
You don`t recollect? - No.
I want to put it to you that it would be - these secretarial reports could be relied on if one had to determine what Congress policy was on a certain matter; it was a guide to Congress policy? - Yes... in what respect?
Any respect? - The resolutions are the policy actually laid down at the conferences.
And if anything in the secretarial report is in conflict with policy that would be taken out? - Well, either it would be taken out or it remained there, because this is bound in advance.
If for instance something appears in a secretarial report being bound in those volumes, and say conference doesn`t approve of it, is it minuted or what happens? - It is minuted; the incoming secretary would take note of that and at the next conference they would report that.
So would it be correct to suggest that unless there are minutes showing that the report or portions of the report was rejected, one can take it as approved? - You see, as far as policy is concerned, the policy is reflected in the resolutions.
I am not talking about whether it is policy or not; but if there is anything in the report which does not meet with the approval of conference, and there is a debate on it, that would be minuted? - That normally would be minuted, yes.
Now, apart from the annual, or biennial, conferences, the day to day work of the Congress movements, by whom was that done? - By the officials in the various provinces.
The officials in the various provinces? - Yes.
The Transvaal Indian Congress had its officials? - Yes.
And did they have a working committee? - Yes.
And Natal had the same? - Yes.
And they carried out the day to day policy of the Congress? - That is right.
And the working committee consisted of members of the Executive, is that correct? - Well, in the Transvaal the working committee was elected in a general meeting whenever it is held. It is supposed to be held biennially - sometimes it takes longer - and the working committee afterwards elects the Executive from the working committee generally.
Now who was the working committee in the Transvaal during the period 1952 onwards? - It would be a long list. I think there used to be eighteen members, if I remember correctly.
Just give us a few names. - Well, for instance, Nana Sita, Mr. Moodie...
Was Kathrada on it? - Yes, I think he was.
And Patel and Moosa, A. E. Patel and H. M. Moosa? - Yes.
They would also be on it? - Yes.
The Indian Congresses used to send fraternal messages and fraternal delegates to other congresses? - Yes.
And they used to invite people to send fraternal messages to them? - Yes.
Is that correct? - Yes, quite.
And in the Transvaal did they have any full time employees? - In the Congress?
Yes, doing Congress work? - In 1952? We were working full time but we were not employed.
What was Kathrada`s work, what does he do in private life, apart from - what is his job? - Kathrada?
Yes? - He works full time in the political movement.
What political movement? - The Congress.
Is he a full time worker? - Yes, full time.
Is he paid by Congress? - No, he does not get paid.
Then how does he live, do you know? - He has got his family - I don`t know...
He gives all his time to this work? - Yes. It is very welcome if anybody gives full time without taking pay.
Yes. Any others who work actively like that? - I worked like that.
Well, you`ve got a business? - At the time of struggle we give up businesses.
But I mean people who devote all their time to this work? - Yes, if they can rely on members of their families they will do that.
Are there any other people? - Well..
What about Faried Adams, what does he do? - He also at times works full time; at times he works for his own living - there are others too - I think Adams was working at some places.
But he also worked full time during this period for the Congress, at times? - Yes.
And the Congress movements, in the Indian Congress, the various Congresses - the Natal Indian Congress, the Transvaal Indian Congress - they kept each other very fully informed as to their activities, not so? - Insofar as the work they did on the common programme was concerned they kept each other informed; but for instance, if they had anything to do with education, and if there is a report, they would send it to us...
In matters affecting the liberatory struggle?- They must inform us, yes.
There was a regular exchange of correspondence? - Yes, quite.
And agenda books and circulars and so on? - The Natal Indian Congress - if somebody goes and brings it, or they might fetch a copy of their agenda book to the Congress - apart from that it is not that they always send everything to the Congress.
But you were satisfied that there was very close cooperation between the Congress movements in regard to the liberatory struggle? - Yes.
And in the same way the South African Indian Congress activities were also fully discussed at the provincial Congress organisations? - The policies actually laid down by the South African Indian Congress - first came to the provincial level, then it would be carried out.
Now, Mr. Cachalia, these fraternal messages that you get and that you publish in your agenda books, you invite people to send these fraternal messages, is that correct? - Yes, we invite - we inform them that we are holding our conference.
And you usually invite sympathetic organisations and individuals to send these messages? - We write to practically all organisations...
I just want to know for instance, you get a message from Chou En-lai in China on a certain day? - Yes.
Do you invite him to send that message? - Yes.
Yes? - We send practically all over the show - and those who feel like sending messages send them.
And did you invite President Eisenhower to send a message? - We must have asked him, we asked everyone. We asked the Prime Minister of Britain too - I ask everyone.
Oh, you ask everyone? - Yes.
Certain people respond and others don`t? - Some respond and some don`t, yes.
Now, your organisation - I am talking about the Congress movement generally - they also held public meetings to propagate their views and their policies? - The Indian Congress?
Yes. - Yes.
And the purpose of those meetings was to keep people informed as to what you wanted, to educate the people for the struggle and to tell them what your objects and purposes are? - Rather put it this way: what they want us to do... our masses...
I don`t quite follow that. - You see, we hold meetings if there is a problem, say in education or a social or a political matter. A meeting is called and held, and at that meeting people will speak and eventually they would pass a resolution based on what the people want. It comes from the floor, it comes from the platform, but it is the views of the people as such which is being taken into account.
But you hold meetings in furtherance of the liberatory struggle? - Yes, this was part and parcel of the community`s movement, you see.
Part and parcel of the communities? - Yes...
And at these meetings your object was to tell the people what you wanted in the liberatory struggle and how you were going to get it? - It is a matter of the question which is before them, and we know the feelings of our community generally, and that is placed before them. If there is any information to be given on special subjects then we only give information at these meetings.
You didn`t hold meetings in order to educate the masses politically? - That too happens, yes.
That also happens? - Yes.
And then you had speakers at those meetings who know the nature of the struggle and the policy of the Congress, and you tell the people? - Yes.
What this policy is, and how freedom should be achieved, so that the masses must know; they must be politically educated. - Yes.
And then, Mr. Cachalia, you also made use of documents as part of your propaganda machine - publications, isn`t that so? - What publications?
I`m asking you? - I want to be clear on this...
Do you know the monthly bulletin New Youth? - I don`t know it, no...
Do you know the bulletin The Call? - I think I have seen one or two copies of that. I don`t know who published it...
Do you know the bulletin published in Natal, N.I.C. News? - Since when?
Since 1953. - It is possible I have seen some copies of it, but I am not very conversant with it...
Do you know the publication Listen Young Friend? - No, I have never heard of it...
Published by the South African Youth Congress. - No, I have never heard of it.
Now, apart from its own publications, Mr. Cachalia, the Indian Congress movement supported a large number of other publications. I think you mentioned two this morning. - Yes.
Advance and Fighting Talk? - Yes. New Age, Advance...
And apart from support for New Age and Fighting Talk mentioned this morning, you don`t know of any other publications that were being supported? - No, I really don`t know, unless I see them...
By whom was Fighting Talk published? - It originally was published by the Springbok Legion.
The Springbok Legion? - Yes; and now I think some committee handles this...
Now, why did the South African Indian Congress tell its people to read specifically Fighting Talk? - Because it undertook to write articles on group areas and questions affecting Indians...
So you were using that to make known the views of the Congress, the Indian Congress, to the Europeans? - Yes, our particular difficulties, yes.
But you told your people to study Fighting Talk? - Yes.
And that they had to study it because Fighting Talk stood four-square behind the whole Congress movement in the liberatory struggle? - Yes; we would ask them to study it as well and read the articles, and support this organ for this purpose, because take for instance if Die Transvaaler was sympathetic to our cause and if they would write articles which would be to the benefit of our Indian cause, we would ask all the Indians to buy that paper too and support Die Transvaaler...
Mr. Cachalia, forget about Die Transvaaler; we are dealing with Fighting Talk. - Yes, but I am giving you an example...
You know that Fighting Talk published a lot of political matter? - Yes.
Dealing with various aspects of the liberatory struggle? - Yes.
And matters connected with the liberatory struggle? - Yes.
Now, in regard to the political matter published in Fighting Talk you never found it necessary to tell your people that anything in Fighting Talk was contrary to Congress policy? - No. You see, people know this much, that these monthly magazines are magazines, and where an article appears it is expressed by the writer, and people are intelligent enough in this world to know from that, well, how this article is - they will judge from whose views are these, and they will come to their own conclusions from that...
You have said, I think, that you can give no details of the committee which ran it? - No, I don`t know, but I know that Ruth First is the editor of the paper Fighting Talk...
Just to clear up one organisational matter, the South African Indian Congress, I think you said, met every two years? - It is not necessary that it meets every two years. It meets sometimes the following year, sometimes two or three years and so on.
According to the Constitution, the constituent bodies sent delegates? - That is correct.
And the Constitution contained in this Agenda Book, A. 83, that makes provision for each province sending delegates, the Transvaal, Natal and so on. Now those delegates were members of the constituent bodies in the provinces? - That is correct.
And they were chosen by the provinces to represent the constituent bodies at the conference? - That is correct.
Now I was dealing yesterday with the question of publications, and we were dealing with Advance and Fighting Talk.- Yes, my Lords.
I want to put it to you that the Congress movement, the Indian Congress movement attached great value to propaganda as a weapon in the liberatory struggle? - Propaganda, yes.
As a weapon in the liberatory struggle? - We like to see that news goes out and is read by everyone, as much as it can spread, yes.
In order to get the people to participate in the liberatory struggle? - Yes, and get the people informed as well, yes.
Now in this Agenda Book, in the Secretarial Report - this is A. 83 - under paragraph 64, it says that the South African Indian Congress must establish a central propaganda machinery for information and guidance of your active workers, is that correct? - Yes.
And that regular bulletins and directives must be issued to our organs, that is the constituent bodies? - Yes.
And a check must be maintained on the activities in all fronts. Then it says, "In these difficult times of bannings and restrictions, we must make greater use of written propaganda", and it says, "we must support such papers as Advance and Fighting Talk, which in the face of financial difficulties are serving the cause of the liberation movement"; we must support them financially or otherwise. - Yes.
Now that was the attitude of the Congress movement to Advance and Fighting Talk and papers of that nature? - Yes.
Financial support and support by other means because they are weapons in the liberatory struggle? - They were giving the news...
Now let us take the first Fighting Talk under the new administration when it was taken over from Springbok Legion, the Fighting Talk of March, 1954. Now you said quite correctly yesterday, and on page 1 this is what the editor is saying: "Fighting Talk has for many years been the organ of the Springbok Legion. It is no longer. From here on it is an independent monthly, edited and managed by an independent committee of supporters of the Congress movement. The members of the three Congresses, the African National Congress, the South African Indian Congress and the South African Congress of Democrats." - When was that published?
In March 1954? - I don`t know at all, because I think I was banned in April or March...
Mr. Cachalia, your banning order was served on you on the 5th of June, and within thirty days you had to resign. I have a copy of the banning order here. - Yes, that can be correct.
Mr. Cachalia told the Court later that he had been confused about the date of banning. He had sent his resignation to the Transvaal Indian Congress on April 16, 1954, for purely personal reasons, and then some of the leaders had requested him to withdraw his resignation. The banning order was received subsequently and his activities had stopped.
Within thirty days you have to resign. Now this was in March. - But I don`t remember taking any resolution by the Transvaal Indian Congress...
Now the type of paper that New Age is, with its political line, would you regard...? - I don`t agree with their views at all, with the views they express. I don`t agree all the time.
Why not? - There may be all sorts of news with which I don`t agree. As far as we are concerned, we are interested in the news which is given and which is taken up as far as the Congress movement is concerned, which affects our community. Then we are interested. And it gives the news very liberally... The point is that if the Transvaaler, as I pointed out yesterday, would view our news liberally, we would support them. We will ask our people to support it, because there is more news, and support further from two points of view that it goes to a certain section of the people, and we will be able to get the other people eventually to understand our position as well. From that point of view we support that paper.
Mr. Cachalia, you know that what you are saying now is not correct? - I am saying absolutely correct. I will give you an instance, for instance of the Transvaaler. During the war some of us thought that this war should not be waged, and during the war I used to go to the editors and they used to publish our news and they used to give our news very prominence in those days, and although I couldn`t read Afrikaans, I used to buy the paper every day.
And did you hold this paper out to your people as your ally in the liberatory struggle? - I told people that look, read the Transvaaler, they give better news about the war...
The Chairman of the Transvaal Indian Youth Congress is E. Moolla. Do you know E. Moolla? - Yes.
Was he a prominent member of the Indian Congress? - He was a member. My Lord, every Indian who is over the age of eighteen is reckoned, according to our constitution, as a member, and when they got to hold a public meeting, and when public meetings are held, you give notice to that effect, and everyone is entitled to participate in that. There is no formal application or anything whatsoever. So they are all members.
I am talking about prominent members. Prominent you know is taking an active part? - Prominent member... will mean how the people look at him, that is one, and, secondly, how much he takes part in the activities of the movement. Now Mr. Moolla did take quite a bit of activity in the movement, that is correct.
Then there was Moosa Moolla, Accused No. 11? - Yes.
He was the Joint Honorary Secretary of the TIYC according to this bulletin? - Maybe.
Do you know him as a prominent member in the TIC? - He was, he was a volunteer, yes...
Then there was Sulliman Esaakjee, do you know him? - Yes.
Also a prominent member in the TIC? - Yes. He is a good worker, of course.
And then this bulletin Ten Fighting Years, it talks about the history of the Transvaal Indian Youth Congress. Mr. Cachalia, when did Gandhi leave South Africa? - 1914.
So you yourself know very little about the actual work of Gandhi in South Africa? - Yes, but when I was in India I often used to see him.
What you say is what you have heard people telling you and what you have read? - My Lord, I am interested - I take Gandhi as my guide, you see, and therefore, I am particularly interested in Mahatma Gandhi. I follow as much as I can.
Now, after Gandhi left in 1914, there were quite a number of passive resistance struggles from time to time, is that correct? - No.
In South Africa? - No, only one, in 1946 and a token passive resistance in 1941.
Only those two? - Those two which are in active form, yes.
Who was the President of the Transvaal Indian Congress at the time Dadoo was elected...in 1946? - Mr. Valod, and after his death I think Mr. Minty, if I remember well.
Now you see, in the History of the Transvaal Indian Youth Congress, this is what the Indian youth say, on page 8 of this bulletin: "Ours is a child of history, born of necessity, as a result of corruption, opportunism, inefficiency and bureaucracy that marred Indian politics in the years since the departure of Mahatma Gandhi from the shores of South Africa." And then they say: "The Youth Congress came into being largely to provide the election machinery for the Dadoo group in its campaign to oust the reactionary discredited individuals who clung onto Congress. It started at the time as the Transvaal Indian Youth Volunteer Corps." Now do you know enough about the Indian Congress history to be able to say that after Gandhi left and up to the time that Dadoo was elected, the Congress movement was in the hands of reactionary individuals, and Congress history was marred by corruption and opportunism and inefficiency? Is that so? - It was so. But when they talk about being in the forefront when Dadoo came and proclaimed him as a leader, and now let us see, we take Mr. Moolla here, I don`t know what his age is at present, but if you take that, practically most of those who are there, that was in 1939 when they tried to proclaim him leader of the Indian Congress, I think they must have been five or ten years old in those days. So what they say does not hold good.
You see, Mr. Cachalia, that whatever you might have done in 1939, it was only in 1947 that the Dadoo group got control of the Indian Congress? - Yes, but in 1939 the Indian community supported us in such a way that we were about to launch the passive resistance and the whole Indian community was behind the movement at the time. That is what I wanted to convey...
Before you were banned, there were Speakers` Notes on the Western Areas which had been prepared? - Prepared by the Transvaal Indian Congress?
Prepared by the Congress Movement, I don`t know who the author was, but the Indian Congress in Natal for instance recommended those lectures as a basis for instruction. Do you know of those lectures? - I don`t know. You see, in Transvaal, when this matter was brought up in the Transvaal Indian Congress, certain people were appointed - that includes Mr. Naidoo, Y. A. Cachalia and some of them - to work and carry out the programme in the Western Areas. And some meetings were held, I remember, where they went and we did not go, and thereafter I was banned, and I don`t know what transpired afterwards...
Can you recall the lectures which you did distribute, can you recall where they came from? - We prepared that.
Did you personally prepare them? - No, my brother and I, yes, one lecture we prepared ourselves. One was prepared by Dr. Dadoo I suppose, some were by Mr. Thandray. He was another secretary of ours, we prepared together, yes.
The lecture you and your brother prepared, can you recall? - The background of Indian history, yes.
Did it have a title? - The History of the Indian People, yes, the Struggle of Indian People, something like that.
The lecture prepared by Dr. Dadoo, do you recall the name of that? - The one was the history, the other one was the Struggle of the Indian People and so on. One was by Dr. Dadoo, I think the Struggles in South Africa.
That as far as you can remember was prepared by Dr. Dadoo? - Yes.
You and your brother prepared a lecture called The History of the Indian People? - That is right. Then we also had Dr. Dadoo`s Addresses, various Addresses which I roneod and printed and we also circulated those, you see. Presidential Addresses and so on.
Do you remember any other lectures? - No. In 1946 struggle there were quite a number of booklets, you see, which were prepared by Dr. Dadoo, three or four. Then by M. D. Naidoo on the Round Table Conference, I think. I am talking of 1946, 1947, 1948, you see. One, I don`t remember the title, but one booklet was prepared by George Singh from Durban, and so on...
Now, Mr. Cachalia, I want to ask you one or two questions about the Defiance Campaign. You said yesterday that about eight thousand defiers took part? - Yes.
Were they all people specially selected for the task? - Quite.
In the Eastern Cape, six thousand were selected? - I don`t know, but they had a large number of volunteers there.
Very few Indian people in the Eastern Cape? - Very few.
Very few people who understand the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi and satyagraha in the Eastern Cape? - Yes. They understand the teachings, quite a number, yes.
In the Eastern Cape? - Yes.
Why is it that when you have got to select people with special qualifications, particular political background and outlook and what not, that you choose five thousand people in the Eastern Cape, and you choose about two hundred and fifty in Natal? - These are volunteers, and in this movement people come voluntarily. We make a call, and people come voluntarily. Now in the Eastern Cape more people came, that they like to defy and they wanted to become volunteers, and that is how they were accepted. It is not that we choose more at one place and less at one place. That was not the case.
You see, I am referring to this report of yours, A. 83. Here you say the Eastern Cape, 5,719; Natal, 246; Transvaal, 1,900.
1 The figures for other regions were:
Western Cape, Mafeking and Kimberley - 423
Orange Free State - 258
Weren`t the Indians in Natal really enthusiastic about this Defiance Campaign? - Yes.
How many Indians are there in Natal? - Nearly four hundred thousand.
And 246 were approved? - Not approved. These are the people who came voluntarily. It is not that anybody was rejected. There may have been some rejections, but that is not the point. It is not a question of approval. It is a voluntary struggle and people come voluntarily; there is no force on anyone, and that amount of people reported, you see...
Can you explain why you can only muster 246 volunteers out of four hundred thousand in Natal? - Well, less people reported. One of the causes may be that they first wanted to know whether this is a joint struggle going on with Africans, experience in the history, whether it will work well or not, you see. It is person`s mind, you see, we don`t know...
How many did you reject in the Transvaal? - I rejected very few.
One thousand and nine hundred offered themselves in the Transvaal? - Yes, very few.
You weren`t really testing the people? - No, we were going into their backgrounds. I have accepted one who had a criminal record of about two years, and we accepted him and we wanted to put him in and see what reaction would be on him after he had served his imprisonment. Then he came back, and I asked him this question, I said now, what do you think of this? And he told me this, that it is far better to go to gaol for an honour than to do criminal things and go to gaol, and I was very satisfied about that.
Mr. Cachalia, you realise that it was a dangerous thing to mobilise a mass of people to defy laws unless they really understand satyagraha as you explained it yesterday? - We explained to them, we explained what is their duty, when they accept the position, we take them. If we feel that - the officer in charge of accepting, if he interviews and he feels that in spite of explanation we must reject him, then he would reject him...
I say you realised that in the Eastern Cape where 5,700 people were mobilised to resist and defy laws, that that created a state of unrest and an explosive situation in the Eastern Cape? - Not necessarily because of the struggle, no, not at all. The volunteers will, never do that, that is what I am saying...
After the Defiance Campaign started in the Cape, were things normal or were they not normal? - I think it was going on quite well, and we were happy that Eastern Cape people are carrying on the movement far advanced than all the other people are.
There were no incidents or disturbances? - No, my Lord, we never came across it. The only thing that we were considering at the moment was why the Eastern Cape has given us best support than any other part of the country, and I think if I remember correctly, we came to this conclusion. There were two factors you see, like Dr. Njongwe 2 Dr. J. L. G. Njongwe, acting provincial President of ANC
was there, he was very popular, who was leading the movement there, and the other thing was that for instance you take any other centres, there is the Xhosa people, most of them are centred in Port Elizabeth and therefore you see, when certain important people of that group of people appeals and that appeal goes very well, then quite a number of people join, and because of that, you see, these more people in numbers joined the struggle. That is what we thought at the time...
Mr. Cachalia, how many Indians are there in Durban? - Quite a number of them.
In 1952, how many of them? - Nearly three hundred thousand people.
How many Xhosas are there in Port Elizabeth? - I don`t know the figure, but quite a number.
Not three hundred thousand? - Less, yes.
Dr. Njongwe, is his appeal to the Xhosas greater than Dr. Naidoo`s 3 Presumably "Dr. Naicker`s" appeal to the Indians? - But there is a difference you see. We take for instance the passive resistance movement in Durban, where the bulk of the resisters came from Durban. But since then there were riots in Durban, and as a result of that people wanted to see how things go and perhaps, you see, therefore there was not that response. There may be other causes. Even the African people did not turn out. Again here in Durban, you see, the bulk of the population is Zulu population, and if one follows, a lot of people would follow with him, you see. But there again if Chief Lutuli would have been there at the time and things advanced as it is now, and Chief calls, half of Durban would come. We all wanted to go and defy. Those are the circumstances; it goes according to the circumstances...
Now the Defiance Campaign, one of the results was that it developed the political consciousness of the masses in this liberatory struggle? - Yes.
The Defiance Campaign was part of the liberatory struggle, was it not? - yes.
And the Defiance Campaign also prepared the people for future struggles that were still to come? - Yes.
And it tested the people to see what mass action can do? - Yes.
And it had to prepare the people not only for future struggles, but also for other forms of struggle? - Yes.
What other forms of struggle for instance? - In passive resistance there are boycotts for instance, there is non-collaboration...
Strikes, too? - Yes, strikes.
And the sacrifices the people were called upon to make during the Defiance Campaign, they would at a later stage be called upon, after that, to make even greater sacrifices than the sacrifices they had to make in the Defiance Campaign? - Yes.
What sacrifices did they have to make in the Defiance Campaign? - Well, they go to gaol, they lose their jobs, people are suffering, I mean to go to sit in gaol, it is a great sacrifice by itself.
And what greater sacrifices had they to expect in future? - Well, say for instance, they lose their jobs for some reason or other, they have to come and work in the movement...
Wasn`t that expected of the people during the Defiance Campaign? - Well, in the Defiance Campaign you see, it is for a month or a couple of months you see, but as the struggle goes on, it increases you see, the sentence may be five years, ten years eventually, and they must be prepared for all that. Their children may be isolated you see, they may suffer probably. If a certain person is sentenced for ten years or something, now he must be prepared, he mustn`t grumble that I am going in for ten years. Now he must go and forget all about his children, whatever attachment they may have for those children. So you see, he must sacrifice all that. That sort of sacrifices are meant. A person may go on a strike for instance, and he loses his job, and he may never get a job, for six months, that is another sacrifice. You see, they must prepare for greater and greater sacrifices each time.
And they had to be prepared even to face death? - Of course, naturally. Say for instance we are in gaol, I may get pneumonia tomorrow and die there. Well, I must be prepared for it, my death. Of course I must be prepared for my death...