Upload
vankhue
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
(With special reference to the Union of South Africa).
* y
Mr. A. H. Broeksma, Q- C.
The Number of Union Nationals.
At the present time there are approximately 15 million Union nationals
or citizens in the Union of South Africa.
The population incidence of this multi-racial state is roughly as
follows 5
Urban Rural Total
Whites 2,500,000 500,000 3,000,000Coloured 1,100,000 400,000 1,500,000Asians 450,000 50,000 500,000Africans 3,000,000 7,000-, 000 10,000,000
(Bantu) ______ ___ __________ ___________________
7,050,000 7,950,000 15,000,000
The Whites consist of two main groups, viz. the Afrikaans and English
speaking groups, to which must be added a number of smaller groups like the
Jews, Hollanders, Portuguese, Germans and others. The Whites total approxi
mately 3 million. The Non-Whites also consist of a number of different groups,
viz. the Bantu, Coloured and Asian groups. The Bantu number approximately
10 million, but their linguistic divisions and differences in forms of social
life and codes make of them a group without complete homogeneity. In fact,
there are fundamental differences in general outlook between the (Kosa), (Zulu),
(Sotho, Tsonga, Venda), and (Tswana) groups. About 4 million of the Bantu
population are resident in Bantu rural areas and 3 million in the other rural
areas of the Union.
In the urban areas there are approximately 3 million Bantu. The Coloured
people comprise that section of the population of the Union not included in
the terms White, Indian, and Bantu. They include such groups as the Cape
Coloureds, the Griqua, the Cape Malays and other smaller groups.
The Coloured people number approximately 1,500,000 which includes
about 80,000 Cape Malays who are mainly concentrated in Cape Town and its
environs.
The Coloured people are distributed more or less as follows? Cape
Province 1,330,000| Transvaal 100,0005 Natal 50,000f Orange Free State 20,000.
The majority therefore live in the Cape Province and predominantly in the
Western Cape, with more than 300,000 concentrated in the Cape Peninsula. In
fact more than 50$ of the Coloured population is concentrated in only 12 of
the major towns and districts of the Cape* Those in the Transvaal mainly
live on the Witwatersrand and those in Natal in Durban. About 70/o of the
Coloured people live in urban areas. Apart from the ordinary rural areas,
some 50,000 live on Mission Stations and in Reserves.
The Indians number approximately 500,000s Natal 361,000 (Durban
alone 160,000); Johannesburg 22,000j Pietermaritzburg 16,000; Cape Town 8,000j
Port Elizabeth 4»000, and the balance are distributed in other towns and rural
areas. Of the total population of Durban, about 34$ is Indian, 30$ White
and 32$ African, so that 1he impact between the different groups is particularly
marked in this city.
The Union of South Africa comprises an extensive territorial area
with an enormous potential waiting for further development. Its population
of 15 million is comparatively small and would not be sufficient to populate
four fairly large European cities. Is it presumptuous to emphasise that there
are only 10 million Bantu, 3 million Whites, 1-J million Coloureds and ■§■ million
Indians in the Union, making a paltry 15 million altogether?
In what may be called the White Areas of the Union, there are approxi
mately 6 million Bantu and 5 million Whites, Coloured and Indians.
It is with these 11 million Union citizens that thi3 paper is mainly
concerned. For the problem in this connection is*
(a) To what extent does responsible citizenship obtain amongst
these Union Nationals?
(b) Is it possible to promote the notion of responsible citizenship
to its fullest extent in the Union?
(c) If so, how?
2. Functions performed by Whites and Non-Whites in the Union.
Very few responsible persons will deny that both the Whites and
Non-Whites are part and parcel of our industrial, agricultural, mining,
domestic and general economic life. This is a realistic fact which cannot
be disputed. It simply exists.
While broadly speaking, the Whites supply the capital, technological
and other skills, such as skilled labour etc., the Non-Whites, again broadly
speaking, are engaged in unskilled and semi-skilled labour of a large variety
of kinds. The whole of the Union's present industrial, mining, agricultural
and eoonomic composition depends upon the joint contributions made by Whites
and Non-Whites in the production of material wealth and the necessities which
keep body and soul together.
This stark, naked, realistic factually existing situation which
impinges upon every aspect of the social, economic and political life of the
Union cannot be blurred or argued away. It is the result of 300 years of
progress, of historical and grand development and, if viewed in objective
perspective, presents a fascinating and gratifying picture of what can be
achieved by human endeavour.
Side by side with the material progress which has been made, there is
the splendid spectacle of educational, medical, housing and hospitalization
achievement to which the Whites have mainly and directly contributed in money
and the Non-Whites indirectly by means of the results of their labour.
This economic and social progress has continually and invariably
received powerful and dynamic incentive from the spiritual and moral leaders
of both Whites and Non-Whites.
Surely, looking back in retrospect, both Whites and Non-Whites have
much cause to be proud of and grateful for the development and progress to
which they, each in their own ways, have contributedl
3. Variations in Standard of Personal Development.
At this point, however, it is necessary to make a short analysis,
which can only be very general, of the standard of personal and individual
development, mentally, morally and spiritually^ which has been reached by
Whites and Non-Whites in the Union.
In this connection, it is advisable to remain mindful of the fact
that, generally speaking and accepting that there have been and will be
gratifying exceptions, the role played by environment and availability of
right opportunity must always have a powerful influence on the standard
of inner development attainable by the average individual citizen.
It is hardly necessary to emphasize that one has in mind mental,
moral and spiritual opportunities as fortified by adequate social and economic
conditions, such as housing and the opportunity to earn a living.
It follows naturally and logically that the average White citizen,
having had more and better opportunities all round, has reached, comparatively
and generally speaking, a higher degree of personal development than the
average Non-White citizen. The question may, however, be put (and one does
so with regret) whether such higher standard has, numerically speaking, been
achieved by as many White citizens as might have been reasonably expected.
A glance at the incidence of crime, immorality and excessive indulgence in
liquor, as well as the lack of an adequate standard of general discipline
and scholastic achievement - even amongst White citizens who have had ex
ceptional opportunities - gives rise to great concern. Somehow they seem to
fall short of the standards demanded by the obligations of responsible citi
zenship.
It also follows naturally and logically that the average Non-White
citizen, who it will readily be admitted, has not had the economic, social
and other advantages which the average White citizen has had, will, again
generally speaking, not yet have achieved a satisfactory and adequate degree
of personal development.
Numerous Non-Whites have attained High Achievement.
There is a perpetual dilemma, even in homogeneous States or Societies,
which invariably confronts sociologists, spiritual leaders and criminologists
and causes them much concern. It is the variable incidence of integrated
and adequate personalities as compared with the high proportion of inadequate
and disintegrated personalities in such homogeneous societies,
A fortiori - this dilemma will occur in a greater degree in a multi
racial society.
However, by reason of his calling and experience in a variety of offices,
the writer hereof has had the opportunity and privilege of meeting and getting
to know a large and representative number of Coloured, Asian and African leaders,
teachers, businessmen, industrialists, farmers and other Non-White citizens in
various walks of life who have availed themselves of such educational and other
opportunities as have come their way, to make a success of their calling and
life.
One often wonders to what extent, if at all, there is sufficient recog
nition and acknowledgement of the degree of human excellence which large
numbers of our fellow citizens, who fall in the Non-White category, have
attained.
If, in a world, of rapid social change, the emphasis on human excellence
and dignity is progressively becoming more pronounced, it is of the highest im
portance that in a multi-racial State, such as ours, those qualities should also
receive due and timeous recognition.
Having, however, said so much, one is bound to add, with equal emphasis,
that it would be absurd not to recognise that a very large proportion of Non-
Whites has, unfortunately, not attained a satisfactory degree of personal develop
ment. At the same time it would seem to be a fatal error not to distinguish
sufficiently between excellence and non-excellence, be the citizens White or Non-
White.
The Problem.
It is now necessary to attempt to answer the first question which arises,
vizs
To what extent does responsible citizenship obtain in the Union?
As has already been stated, there are roughly, in round figures, 15 million
Union nationals or citizens who belong to the Union of South Africa, of whom,
very approximately about 11 million are to be found in those portions of the
Union which are not part of the recognised Bantu territories.
Of these 11 million about 3 million are Whites. White men and women of
and above the age of 18 possess the Parliamentary franchise. But a substantial
proportion of the 3 million Whites consists of non-adults and otheiswho, for
some reason or other, have no voting rights.
Coloured males^^who conform to certain qualifications and have reached
the age of 21 years, may be registered as voters to elect four White representa
tives in the Assembly and, in addition, are given some representation in the
Senate. As has been stated, there are approximately ijg million Coloured citi
zens in the Union of whom a large proportion are women and children.
If the franchise is taken to be the acme of responsible citizenship, it
follows that the rights implicit in the notion of responsible citizenship are
exercisable by a portion of 4s million Whites and Coloured people and then only
in a qualified sense in so far as the latter are concerned. 10 million Bantu,
of whom 6 million in the white areas of the Union, and the Asians and Coloured
people outside the Cape Province have not, or will not in the near future, have
direct representation in the Union Parliament.
It does not, however, follow that those Non-Whites who do not possess the
franchise do not meet or are not capable of fulfilling the majority of obligations
attaching to responsible citizenship. Indeed, the overwhelming majority of the
Union's nationals or citizens, be they White or Non-White, are law-abiding and
peace-loving citizens.
(+) In the Cape Province. (++) These figures are approximate.
But is this passive or placid, attituder or lack of attitude, however
commendable or gratifying, the sole connotation which, it is intended, should
be given to the term "responsible citizenship”?
Surely the term implies not only obligations, but also rightssof
citizenship. It postulates both 1iie right and the obligation of obtaining
suitable representation in the Councils of State in order that the citizen's
interests and those of his depender.ts may be properly secured.
If, on account of his qualifications and excellence, he is desired by
his fellow-citizens to represent their and his own interests in municipal,
provincial or higher bodies, surely it is his duty to make himself so available
if it at all lies in his power.
It is however, no overstatement to submit that, at present at any rate,
such obligations and rights of full, responsible citizenship are not available
to the general body of Union citizens, however high and outstanding their
individual excellence and qualifications as citizens may otherwise be.
Is it incorrect to suggest that there are considerable cross-sections
of Non-White citizens whose aptitude and ripeness for the exercise of
responsible citizenship in the fullest sense of the term are as pronounced
and obvious as is their participation in the complex activities of our
industrial, social and economic life?
The vexed and awkward question however, iss
Is it possible to promote the notion of responsible citizenship
to its fullest extent in this multi-racial Union of ours?
6. Is there an alternative?
The answer to the question which has just been posed can only be in
positive form. In a world of rapid social change there can be no alternative.
Ways and means must simply be sought and found in order to satisfy what has
become an inexorable social and political requirement. Unless this is done,
the use of this particular term, viz. responsible citizenship, becomes com
pletely meaningless and a charge of evasion or hypoorisy inevitable. It must,
however, be forthwith conceded that the difficulties and embarrassments which
beset our social and political leaders in this respect, are almost insurmount
able. The prevailing political and general climate can hardly be said to be
encouraging and conducive to successful effort.
Our multi-racial society is diverse, the degree of civilization which
has "been reached hy the various races ranges from stark barbarism to pinnacles
of high endeavour; a complex variety of religious, cultural and social customs;
a diversity of mental, moral and spiritual standards; and the incidence of
abject poverty side by side with untold wealth; all contribute to create a
political climate which is so charged with emotional thunderstorms and con
fusion of thought, that any effort, however well-intentioned in this respect,
is almost certainly doomed to failure* Indeed, serious and laudable attempts
to create a better atmosphere and to find new approaches which will bridge
the chasms existing between the component races of the Union are continuously
being made.
Political philosophies such as Guardianship, Partnership, Apartheid,
"Eiesoortige Ontwikkeling", Liberalism, etc., have been and are being invoked
in order to pave the way to such form of responsible citizenship as will
contribute to the maintenance of a stable and happy multi-racial society.
But we are living in a world of rapid social change. And has it not
become much later than we think?
Has the concept of Guardianship not become antiquated and obsolete,
may Partnership not be too leonine and vague; what exactly is the meaning of
Apartheid; and how far does "Eiesoortige Ontwikkeling" take us? To what extent
do these philosophies help to promote the notion of common responsible citizen
ship in a multi-racial society which will inevitably continue to remain multi
racial?
For his part, the writer hereof finds it impossible to see the wood for
the trees in this respect.
7. Is Reciprocal Trusteeship a possible answer?
One is inclined to assume that there must be deep and well-founded
anxiety amongst political and social philosophers in the Union at the thought
that there are hardly any channels of friendly and compassionate communication
and personal contact between the political leaders of the various races or
component units of our multi-racial society. Is it wrong to suggest that in
order to create a healthier and more promising climate for the promotion of
the notion of responsible citizenship, more effective methods of consultation
between the political leaders of 1he White and Non-White communities have
become matters of urgent necessity? Has there not been too much of an outmoded
tendency on the part of the Whites to assume the burdensome and impossible
task of Guardianship over wards who in many cases have attained mental, moral
and spiritual majority?
One realises that there are wards and wards. The differences in
personal development have already been emphasised. But in a world of rapid
BOCial change new philosophies and approaches “become imperative. And one
wonders whether a changed formulation (which probably can only be temporary and must be elastic) may not assist in promoting better contacts and better
understandings on a basis of self-respect which may lead to fuller self-
realization? One has in mind some practical and acceptable procedure which
will make "summit meetings" between White and Non-White leaders possible in
order that the manifold racial and other problems which affect our whole
multi-racial community may be discussed in an atmosphere of compassionate
understanding. The climate of the discussions would not then be on the basis
of Guardianship, but of reciprocal trusteeship.
Are we each other's keepers? Is there sufficient mutuality, sufficient
reciprocity, a sufficient realization of the obligations we, as members of
a multi-racial society, owe as race to race to see that nothing is daid or
done that will damage the interests of the other party?
The writer suggests with much diffidence, but with complete conviction,
that the philosophy of Guardianship has become, or is rapidly becoming, out
moded. It may perhaps still hold good in backward communities (and then only
for a time), but it casts an impossible burden on the self-appointed Guardian?
leads to misguided and one-sided spoonfeeding efforts which will receive
no appreciation; and will not much longer be tolerated by those citizens who
are able and willing to assume the obligations of responsible citizenship in
the fullest sense of the word.
If, however, Non-White leaders are willing to accept the obligations
of Trusteeship in the highest and best sense of the word, i.e. to look after
the interests of the Whites as well as of the Non—Whites and were given this
opportunity by the White leaders, the notion of responsible citizenship may
probably receive a powerful incentive. Of course, it is of paramount import
ance that this principle of Trusteeship and its reciprocal or mutual basis
shall be accepted by both Whites and Non-Whites in a spirit of complete trust
and integrity.
To meet the objection and critjdism, viz. that this approach is hare
brained, naively optimistic and utterly impracticable, the writer has in
Annexure "A" hereto ventured to recount as a precedent the manner in which
the principle of Reciprocal Trusteeship was applied to a multi-racial problem
which had assumed critical dimensions some nineteen years ago. The result
was that what had appeared to be an insoluble situation at the outset, was
solved in a spirit of reciprocal goodwill to the entire satisfaction of all
reasonable persons concerned.
8. A South African Privy Council?
In 1938 when the clouds of war were gathering and the Union’s internal
problems were also gaining momentum* tho then Prime Minister instructed the
writer to draft a Bill to make provision for the creation of an Advisory
Council to the Cabinet, which the Prime Minister compared to something in the
nature of the Privy Council in Britain or the "Raad van Staten" in the
Netherlands. It was the Prime Minister's feeling that in the critical times
which were looming ahead, the Cabinet should have at its disposal an advisory
body of men of excellence and high standing, representatives of all important
walks of life in the South African community. The Cabinet would then be in
a position best to assess the temper of the nation and avail itself of the
advisers whose ripe experience and mature judgment would help to keep the
Ship of State on an even keel.
It was General Hertzog*s intention to secure the services of ex-Chief
Justices, ex-Ministers of the Crown, ex-Administrators and selected represent
atives of important public bodies and organizations whose outstanding services
and experiences at the same time entitled them to the honour of becoming
members of the Council of State. In the course of our discussions, the
desirability of appointing outstanding Non-White leaders to the Council was
mooted and further developments in that direction were to be kept in mind.
In the writer's humble view, it was a tragedy that the events which
followed the outbreak of war in 1939> dissipated the Prime Minister's inten
tions into thin air.
It was tho rapid march of events in a rapidly changing world which
made a brilliantly conceived constitutional innovation (in so far as the
Union was concerned) nothing more than a belated "Idea". The question now
arises — and it is put forward with great respect and humility — in view of
the rapid march of present-day events, may not the creation of a body selected
on similar lines as the late General Hertzog had in mind, be an important
step in stimulating the notion of responsible citizenship? If the recog
nized leaders of Non—White opinion were invited to become members and to
attend from time to time "summit meetings" on the highest level, could any
thing but good result? May it be suggested that the principle of Reciprocal
Trusteeship would then be applied in an atmosphere of mutual trust and
honesty of purpose?
The multi-racial character of the Union would be maintained and group
differences would be recognized, but on a basis of mutual and self-respect
which would gradually assist in directing the various racial groups to
self-realization and the acceptance and application of the notion of
responsible citizenship in the fullest sense of the word.
9, The Franchise.
Let there be clarity in respect of the notion of Responsible Citizen
ship and the Franchise in a multi-racial State. The fact that the franchise
is an inescapable connotation of responsible citizenship cannot be miraged
away. The question arises, however? Can it at this moment of time, even
when events are marching forward with critical rapidity, be given in the wide
democratic sense, vizs universally? The question so put answers itself.
But once Representative Citizens, (men of high achievement and complete
integrity of character no matter what their colour, race or creed) have been
selected as members of the Union's Council of State (to give it a name),
a suitable answer to this very vexed problem will most certainly be found.
Be that as it may, the prime necessity is to find a procedure which will
bring together the recognized leaders of the different racial groups in
the Union together on a basis which will promote the notion of responsible
citizenship in its fullest significance.
Let such attempt take place on the highest level and not, at this
stage, on the common low level of universal enfranchisement which cannot and
will not work in the present state of our political climate.
One is reminded of a striking expression which recently was used in
one of the U.N.O. debates by a speaker who saids
"The situation is out of balance. Let us attempt to make
mind meet mind".
It is submitted that any attempt to promote the notion of responsible citi
zenship in a multi-racial state such as ours, must take place in an atmos
phere where Mind is likely to meet Mind, i.e. on the highest level and by
means of "Summit Talks".
The promotion of Responsible Citizenship is embarrassingly difficult,
but is it quite impossible?
10. Apologia
When the writer was approached to prepare a paper on the difficult sub
ject of "Responsible Citizenship", he shrank from the task.
But on reflection he decided to regard the invitation as a high
compliment which could not he allowed to pass without humhle acknowledgement
At the same time he became deeply conscious that it was his duty to accept
the task as an example of what its discharge could he, vizs a venture in
responsible citizenship.
If he has, in the process of avoiding certain time-honoured platitudes
skated over thin, very thin ice, he apologizes and craves forgiveness.
But he has tried to present an objective picture of what he conceives
to be a factual position and to suggest a philosophical approach which ought
to work, if applied with courage and understanding. And if he has erred
by presenting an approach which on the face of it may sound puerile, naive,
impractical, super-idealistic or invoke any other epithet, his answer is
that he has erred in good company. For the thoughts expressed by him are
by no means original, and most of them germinated in the mind of a great
statesman, a bold and enlightened human being.
See Annexure
ANNEXURE "A"
CAN RECIPROCAL TRUSTEESHIP WORK?
IT DID 19 YEARS AGO.
It happened at a well-known seaside resort.
Parliament had adopted so-called Bathing Regulations which had "been
drafted by the municipal council concerned in collaboration with the Depart
ment of Lands. The regulations purported to regulate sea-bathing by Whites
and Non-Whites and apportioned the sea for separate use by them.
The legality of the regulations was challenged by a Coloured person
on the ground that the apportionment was grossly unjust, the Non-Whites having
been given all the rocks and the Whites everything else. The matter was
taken to Court but postponed to enable the parties to arrive at a more
equitable apportionment. There is no doubt that if the matter had proceeded
to final judgment the Regulations would have been set aside and grave em
barrassment caused to the White property owners and the hoteliers of the
resort. Economic, social and community welfare was at stake and the atmos
phere was charged with emotion and colour prejudice on both sides.
■ u < . i t if, v t S i i X l * . ;• i.- i f t jr *•<*._, • •» -Acting upon a suggestion made by the Court, the responsible Minister
decided to attempt settlement of the dispute by negotiation.‘
A commission of three Whites and three Non-Whites was appointed. The
idea of Guardianship and Ward was specifically rejected and the commission
unanimously decided to conduct its investigations and hear witnesses on the
principle of Reciprocal Trusteeship and on the lines referred to in this paper.
Evidence was heard on an extensive scale. The moderation and under
standing of the public importance of the issues involved displayed by both
Whites and Non-Whites was gratifying# At times grave situations arose but
on every occasion the principle in question was applied and in the end a
solution satisfactory to all was reached. A gentlemen’s agreement was
drafted} it was decided not to use the words "For Europeans Only" or "Non-
Europeans Only"} an Advisory Council of Coloured Persons was created in order
to advise and collaborate with the Town Council. The final result was that
the Non-Whites obtained an ideal camping site which was named "Harmony" and
in addition a fine picnicking site. By common agreement, separate bathing-
sites were apportioned on an equitable basis and it was finally decided that
in the circumstances no Statutory Regulations would need to be proclaimed.
<
«
This gentlemen's agreement persists to this day. The specific racial
groups have their own separate amenities.
The writer makes hold to say that any other approach to the problem,
whether on the principle of Guardianship, Partnership, Apartheid, "Eiesoortige
Ontwikkeling" or any other elusive principle would have failed to achieve
the result which was thus reached.
The principle of Trusteeship was clearly understood by the parties
concerned. It was accepted from the start that the intellectual, moral
and spiritual standing of both Whites and Non-Whites was to be regarded as
having an equal status. And it was also realized that very important White
property rights were in the balance. Thus by creating a climate of mutual
trust in which the self-respeot of all parties was at all times preserved,
a solution of a difficult problem was reached.
The outstanding and gratifying feature of the deliberations was the
spirit of selflessness and co-operation displayed by the Non-Whites together
with their sense of justice which was all the more striking as it had beeia
their side which had initially and admittedly been the victim of gross
injustice. The Non-Whites, citizens of the part from which the writer hails
at present, are great negotiators and alive to the interests of the Whites -
provided they are treated on a basis which does not detract from their self-
respect. All through they acted as Trustees of the interests of the Whites.
It is submitted that the approach in question directed the negotiations
into a direction which made the practical application of the principle of
Responsible Citizenship a matter of consummate ease.
Collection Number: AD1715
SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE OF RACE RELATIONS (SAIRR), 1892-1974
PUBLISHER: Collection Funder:- Atlantic Philanthropies Foundation
Publisher:- Historical Papers Research Archive
Location:- Johannesburg
©2013
LEGAL NOTICES:
Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.
Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.
People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or
omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.
This document forms part of the archive of the South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), held at the Historical
Papers Research Archive at The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.