Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:54:09.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reactions to Rinderpest in Southern Africa 1896–97

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2009

C. van Onselen
C. van Onselen
Affiliation:
St Antony's College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Rinderpest, a highly contagious cattle disease which swept through southern Africa in 1896–7, has attracted little interest from historians. A more detailed consideration of its effect on a cattle-keeping peasantry within the context of an industrializing economy assists in illuminating some of the socio-economic and political forces operative in the 1890s.

The spread of rinderpest was acompanied by widespread suspicion and rumour. Some Europeans thought that the disease was spread by Africans. Many Africans, for their part, were convinced that rinderpest was a product of the white man's malice. Over large areas rinderpest was accepted with an attitude of fatalism and resignation. In Basutoland and East Griqualand, however, local leaders emerged who were willing to utilize grievances and rumours stemming from rinderpest for attempts at mobilization for the wider objective of revolt.

The loss of large numbers of cattle caused considerable social and economic distress in African communities. The transport system was paralysed in an economy dependent on the extensive use of the ox-wagon, and this resulted in price rises and profiteering in more remote areas. With the disappearance of the source of meat and milk Africans experienced considerable hardship and in some cases starvation. Forced into taking contingency action, activities ranged from planting vegetables to stock-thieving. Generally, however, the impoverishment of Africans caused by rinderpest contributed to the growing proletarianization of Africans and the process of labour migration. Rinderpest did not produce fundamental structural changes in Southern African society, but it did emphasize the processes which were to characterize industrial South Africa of the twentieth century.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of African History , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 1972 , pp. 473 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 As defined by the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, Cape of Good Hope, Special Report on Rinderpest in South Africa March 1896–February 1897 (hereafter Special Report), 32.Google Scholar

2 See Middleton, J., ‘Colonial Rule Among the Lugbara’, in Turner, V. W. (ed.), Colonialism in Africa 1870–1960, vol. III (Cambridge, 1971), 13.Google Scholar

3 Special Report, 5.Google Scholar

4 Wills, A. J., An Introduction to the History of Central Africa (Oxford, 1967), 165, reports the disease as being present in Southern Rhodesia in 1895. The Directors Report of the British South Africa Company for the year ending 31st March 1897, reports the first outbreak as occurring in Matabeleland in Feb. 1896. Special Report, 7, gives the date of the first outbreak as 3 03 1896.Google Scholar

5 Special Report, 7.Google Scholar

6 Eastern Province Herald, 12 11. 1897.Google Scholar

7 See Wilson, M. and Thompson, L. (eds.), The Oxford History of South Africa, vol. II (Oxford, 1971), 116.Google Scholar

8 The Bechuanaland territories through which the Missionaries' Road passed had the misfortune to be the first area through which rinderpest spread particularly rapidly and in a very virulent form. Rinderpest killed ‘not less than 90 per cent—at a low estimate—of the enormous herds of cattle…’ and left in its wake ‘hundreds of wagons stranded along the roads’. Bechuanaland Colonial Report No. 226 (hereafter Colonial Report No. 226), 4, 9.

9 The Transvaal established local Rinderpest Commissions. In the Cape, a national Rinderpest Commission was established by Government Proclamation No. 243 of 1896. The latter functioned for approximately three months before being disbanded in the face of public hostility to the ‘stamping out’ policy. See Cape of Good Hope, Dept. of Agriculture, Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon and the Assistant Veterinary Surgeons for the year 1896 (hereafter Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon), 25−6.

10 Two conferences were called on the initiative of the Cape Government. See Minutes of the Inter-State Conference held at Mafeking, 17th April 1896, and Minutes of Rinderpest Conference held at Vryburg, August 1896 (hereafter Vryburg Conference). Kruger was host to a rinderpest conference on his own farm, see Eastern Province Herald, 28 07 1897.Google Scholar Finally an “International Rinderpest Conference’ was held late in 1897, see Eastern Province Herald, 4 08. 1897.Google Scholar

11 The failure to agree to the payment of costs involved, so the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon felt, seriously jeopardized the success of the campaign against rinderpest, see Special Report, 11–12.Google Scholar

12 See, for example, Walker, E. A., A History of Southern Africa (London, 1965), 459 and Ranger, T. O., Revolt in Southern Rhodesia 1896–7 (London, 1967), 113.Google Scholar

13 Saker, H. and Aidridge, J., ‘The Origins of the Langeberg Rebellion’, J. Afr. Hist., XII, 2 (1971), 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 In Basutoland: ‘Thousands of labourers returned in panic from Johannesburg and other parts, full of misleading reports that war was imminent between English and Dutch.’ Basutoland Colonial Report No. 186 (hereafter Colonial Report No. 186), 4. See also magisterial report for the Mafeking district, Cape of Good Hope, Blue Book on Native Affairs, 1897 (hereafter Blue Book 1897).Google Scholar

15 From the Congo to the Cape, Africans believed that rinderpest was spread by the white man. For the Congo and Uganda see, J. Middleton, ‘Colonial Rule’, for Bechuanaland, see Saker, and Aldridge, , ‘Langeberg rebellion’, 311,Google Scholar for Basutoland see, Basutoland Colonial Report No. 224 (hereafter Colonial Report No. 224), 8,Google Scholar and for the Transkei, see Scully, W. C., Further Reminiscences of a South African Pioneer (London, 1913), 317.Google Scholar

16 Colonial Report No. 224, 6.Google Scholar

17 The number of rinderpest guards on the borders must have contributed to African suspicions. By the end of January 1897 Natal had 110 guards on duty, see Eastern Province Herald, 22 01. 1897.Google Scholar

18 Colonial Report No. 224, 5.Google Scholar

19 Ibid. 42.

20 During the early part of the campaign against rinderpest entire herds in which the disease manifested itself were shot. As no compensation was paid at an early stage, this ‘stamping out’ policy did not elicit much co-operation and perhaps even facilitated the spread of the disease. See Special Report, 8.Google Scholar While executing these duties Veterinary Surgeons were on occasion threatened by armed whites, see Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 22, 24–5, 137.Google Scholar

21 This action, coupled with the events which preceded and followed it caused considerable political tension. For colonial administrators it was a bad year: ‘Foremost amongst the causes was the advent of rinderpest.… From a political point of view it wrought great havoc in the country …', Colonial Report No. 224, 5.Google Scholar Whites too were affected by the tensions and there was an upsurge of ‘nervous complaints’ reported by the Medical Officer, see Ibid. 47–8.

22 Ibid. 6–7.

23 See Lagden, G. Y., The Basutos, vol. II (London, 1909), 590–1.Google Scholar

24 Colonial Report No. 224, 5.Google Scholar

25 See J. Leeuwenburg, ‘The Griqua Reformation Movement in the 20th Century’, unpublished paper presented to the seminar on ‘The Societies of Southern Africa ’at the University of London, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, May 1971, 2.

26 Dower, W., The Early Annals of Kokstad and Griqualand East (Port Elizabeth, 1902), 122.Google Scholar

27 Cape of Good Hope, Blue Book on Native Affairs, 1898, (hereafter Blue Book 1898), 118.Google Scholar The use of this slogan forms the basis for some interesting speculation. The slogan seems to be the local adaptation of the more famous ‘Africa for the Africans’, pioneered by the radical missionary Joseph Booth. Towards the end of 1896 Booth was, for some three months, active in the adjacent territory of Natal. See Shepperson, G. and Price, T., Independent African (Edinburgh, 1958), 59–70.Google Scholar At this time Booth attempted, unsuccessfully, to establish an ‘African Christian Union’, which would follow a policy of ‘Africa for the Africans’. it seems likely that Le Fleur heard of this slogan. In any event he put it to use and it gained him considerable support, see Blue Book 1898. There is little doubt that Booth's activities at this time aroused interest over a wide area. See, for example, a letter to the editor in the Eastern Province Herald, 18 01. 1897.Google Scholar

28 Blue Book 1898, 118.Google Scholar

29 Ibid

30 Eastern Province Herald, 27 01. 1897.Google Scholar

31 Ibid.

32 Eastern Province Herald, 29 01. 1897.Google Scholar

33 Blue Book 1898, 119.Google Scholar

34 Blue Book 1898, 119–20.Google Scholar

35 Blue Book 1898, 120.Google Scholar

36 Blue Book 1892, 120.Google Scholar From late 1896 there seem to be widespread fears of a ‘native uprising’. Bulawayo Sketch, 19 12. 1896. See also Departmental Records Colony of Natal 1897, B. 66.Google Scholar

37 Two examples should suffice. A coloured Veterinary Surgeon, J. F. Soga, sent to help in the fight against rinderpest in Bechuanaland, made use of his official report to complain of the lot of the Vaalpense: ‘These poor people, or, as I might term them, slaves, “which they virtually are”, among the Baralongs, caused us much anxiety. Moreover, it is a scandalous shame that slavery should exist in our midst.’ (Emphasis in the original.) Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 135. In Basutoland, after the Makhaola disturbances a commission with African and European members was established to determine the Cape-Basutoland border exactly. Colonial Report No. 224, 37.Google Scholar At least one Chief made use of this to renew an old land claim, see Colonial Report No. 224, 37.Google Scholar

38 For evidence that the disease was spread unconsciously by Africans, see, for example, Special Report, 20. Officials were most concerned with the spread of the disease by Africans. See Vryburg Conference, 14–15 or Notulen van die Tweeden Volksraad der ZA Republiek, 1896, 22. I have been able to trace only one case of the disease being spread maliciously: ‘Jacob Smith, a rinderpest guard, has been sentenced to five years and 100 lashes for spreading rinderpest by placing diseased meat on a farm’, Eastern Province Herald, 22 01. 1897.Google Scholar

39 Vryburg Conference, 26.Google Scholar

40 See, for example, Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 42, and Special Report, 30 and 40.Google Scholar

41 In the Cape authorized by Government Proclamation No. 409 of 1896. This also created a good market for ‘authorized’ disinfectants see, Eastern Province Herald, 11 Dec. 1896.

42 Vryburg Conference, 17.Google Scholar

43 Special Report, 43.Google Scholar

44 Colonial Report No. 224, 25.Google Scholar In a country with strong racial prejudices, dipping Africans in disinfectants was the logical outcome of some stereotypes. The Durban City Council dipped all newcomers in disinfectant until at least 1925. See Johns, S. W., ‘The Industrial and Commercial Workers Union of Africa’, in Rotberg, R. I. and Mazrui, A. A. (eds.), Protest and Power in Black Africa (New York, 1970), 728.Google Scholar

45 Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 28.Google Scholar

46 Bley, H., South- West Africa under German Rule (London, 1971), 123.Google Scholar

47 In the Uitenhage district one village lost 132 of its 776 inhabitants to the Enon Mission Station. Cape of Good Hope, Blue Book on Native Affairs, 1899 (hereafter Blue Book 1899), 49.

48 Blue Book 1897, 79.Google Scholar

49 Reported in the Eastern Province Herald, 29 Sep. 1897.

50 The mid 1890s saw considerable destruction by locusts over a wide area of southern Africa. See Basutoland Colonial Report No. 186, 3Google Scholar, also Walker, E. A., History of Southern Africa, 459Google Scholar For Natal, see Marks, S., Reluctant Rebellion (Oxford, 1970), 129.Google Scholar

51 Eastern Province Herald, 29 09. 1897.Google Scholar

52 Special Report, 27.Google Scholar

53 Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 27.Google Scholar

54 Special Report, 39. Farmers' attitudes are perhaps best expressed in a letter to the Eastern Province Herald, 11 12. 1896.Google Scholar

55 See, for example, the ‘unfailing preventative’ suggested by ‘Matabele’ Thompson, , Eastern Province Herald, 24 11. 1897.Google Scholar

56 Special Report, 23–4.Google Scholar

57 Special Report, 24. The luxury of experimenting with ‘concoctions’ in the Transvaal did not extend to Africans. Officials there were wary of ‘Kaffir doctors’. As a delegate to the Vryburg Conference explained: ‘We are stricter with them than with the ordinary kaflir.’ Vryburg Conference, 22.Google Scholar

58 Cape of Good Hope, Rinderpest—Report of Visit of Native Representatives to Bechuanaland.

59 See, for example, the evidence of John Manyi, Ibid. 11.

60 Ibid.

61 Blue Book 1898, 109.Google Scholar

62 Eastern Province Herald, 7 08. 1896. See also Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 138, and Marks, S., Reluctant Rebellion, 129.Google Scholar

63 Colonial Report No. 226, 5.Google Scholar

64 See Departmental Records Colony of Natal 1897, B.22 and F.46; also Blue Book 1898, 122, 127.Google Scholar

65 National Rinderpest Commission disbanded 1 Oct. 1896, Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 25.Google Scholar

66 Report of the Colonial Veterinary Surgeon, 40–1.Google Scholar

67 Eastern Province Herald, 12 07 1897. See also, Fort Beaufort Rinderpest Enquiry, Nov. 1898, and Marks, S., Reluctant Rebellion, 139.Google Scholar

68 Eastern Province Herald, 26 07 1897.Google Scholar

69 Ibid. 30 07 1897.

70 Ibid. 24 11. 1897.

71 Blue Book 1899, 27.Google Scholar

72 Wilson, M. and Thompson, L. (eds.), The Oxford History of South Africa, 11, 116.Google Scholar It seems likely that African cattle losses were substantially higher than white, for a number of reasons: (a) communal grazing increased the possibilities of infection, (b) African suspicions militated against widespread inoculation, and (c) with serum in short supply Africans with cattle are unlikely to have received any priority. In at least one area, Barotseland, African cattle were not badly affected by rinderpest, if at all. See, Gann, L. H., Birth of a Plural Society (Manchester, 1958), 152.Google Scholar

73 Marks, S., Reluctant Rebellion, 128. Not all administrators were unaware of this; see Colonial Report No. 226, 4.Google Scholar For a brief discussion of the wider aspects involved, see Belshaw, C. S., Traditional Exchange and Modern Markets (New Jersey, 1965), 29–34.Google Scholar

74 In Rhodesia, ‘Draught animals of all kinds are selling at extremely high figures. On Saturday's market one donkey realized £30. Very inferior oxen, with two months' guarantee against rinderpest, fetched £30 each.’ Eastern Province Herald, 1 Sep. 1897. See also Eastern Province Herald, 23 June 1897.

75 Colonial Report No. 226, 14.Google Scholar

76 See, for example, the diversification of Riddel and Goosen, auctioneers, into a transport forwarding agency. Bulawayo Sketch, 19 09. 1896.Google Scholar

77 Reported in the Eastern Province Herald, 24 Nov. 1897.

78 Eastern Province Herald, 8 09. 1897.Google Scholar

79 Colonial Report No. 226, 5.Google Scholar

80 Eastern Province Herald, 1 09. 1897.Google Scholar

81 Bley, H., South-West Africa, 125.Google Scholar

82 Blue Book 1899, 11.Google Scholar

83 See especially reports from the magisterial districts of Bizana and King William's Town, Blue Book 1899. Rinderpest contributed to what was already an inadequate diet, see De Kiewiet, C. W., A History of South Africa (Oxford, 1957), 81.Google Scholar

84 Blue Book 1899, 89–20.Google Scholar

85 Ibid. 73.

86 Ibid. 63, 65, 72, 73 and 108.

87 Blue Book 1899, 63.Google Scholar

88 Blue Book 1899, 78, 109.Google Scholar From Butterworth it was reported that: ‘This season also a great deal of land has been turned over and in spite of the absence of draught oxen, owing to the ravages of rinderpest, it is difficult to find a piece of amble land uncultivated.…’ Ibid. 74.

89 Colonial Report No. 224, 9.Google Scholar

90 See Blue Book 1899, 16, 74.Google Scholar

91 Colonial Report No. 226, 5.Google Scholar

92 Blue Book 1899, 40, 50, 114.Google Scholar

93 The Chief Magistrate of the Transkei reported that: ‘It is surprising (notwithstanding the high price of cattle in the Colony) how many cattle, principally young animals, are being purchased from colonial farmers with money earned on the mines and public works, and brought into the territories.’ Blue Book 1899, 71.

94 For permanent movement off the land, see, Bley, H., South-West Africa, 75,Google Scholar or Wilson, M. and Thompson, L. (eds.), The Oxford History of South Africa, 11127. Also Blue Book 1899, 49.Google Scholar

95 H. Bley, Ibid. 225.

96 Wills, A. J., An Introduction to the History of Central Africa, 159.Google Scholar

97 Blue Book 1899, 71,77.Google Scholar

98 Blue Book 1899, 51–2.Google Scholar

99 Ibid. 65.

100 Ibid. 31, 53.

101 Colonial Report No. 226, 13.Google Scholar

102 De Kiewiet, C. W., A History of South Africa, 95.Google Scholar

103 Scully, W. C., Further Reminiscences, 317.Google Scholar

104 Marks, S., Reluctant Rebellion, 130.Google Scholar

105 Blue Book 1899, 81. See also ibid. 82.