08 Mar 1939 Clay (6)
8th March, 1939.
Mr. Clay's Summing Up Continued.
As a result of the visit of the Ngambela to Balovale, more concessions were given to the Lovale and Lunda by the Paramount Chief. Shinde and Ndungu were each told in a letter from Yeta that they might have four hunters, and sub-chiefs one each. In addition, Shinde was informed that Mpili could have the Kakonga fishing pools.
On arrival at Livingstone an Indaba was held before Mr. Dundas as Acting Governor on 31/3/37. To Mr. Caldwell, who was present as interpreter to the Lunda and Lovale Chiefs, the Acting Governor said: "It would be far easier for me to say to Shinde, You must leave the country" than it would be for me to say to Yeta "I am not going to recognise your authority at Balovale." Neither course is the least bit desirous and probably not fair to either party.... The Barotse are recognised by the Government as having suzerainty over that area."
He also said that he agreed that the Barotse went beyond instructions and provoked the trouble. He also told Mr. Caldwell that if Shinde refuses to recognise Yeta "we shall have to consider what means there are open to us to coerce." "I have not recognised Shinde yet."
On Page 4 the Acting Governor says "The mere fact that he (Shinde) consented to the establishment of the kuta surely implies some recognition of Yeta as his superior." To this Mr. Caldwell replied "We have thought that all along."
On Page 8 Mr. Caldwell said "On many occasions subjects of Shinde, being dissatisfied with his judgements went to Nawinda on their own account." These two statements of Mr. Caldwell's are very important and extremely interesting.
Next the Acting Governor interviewed Yeta and the Marozi. Page 1 the Acting Governor said to Yeta "I think it would be very unwise that he should go home to England before it is settled."
On Page 9 the Ngambela said "There have been some
-2-
sites on which the old Marozi people lived before they came into this country." This shows that the claim to old sites was not invented for the sake of the Commission, for there was no question of the appointment of any Commission when this remark of the Ngambela's was made.
On Page 14 the Acting Governor said "I think Lewanika was wise! He never put a kuta there." (i.e. Balovale district.) Before Nawinda was sent to Balovale, Government, as I have previously noted, were consulted, and in fact there is some reason for supposing that the first suggestion came from them. If there was any lack of wisdom in Yeta and the kuta for sending Nawinda to Balovale, Government must also be considered to have been unwise in giving its consent.
When the Acting Governor met the Lovale he said (P.11) "The Government made the Barotse remove the indunas which had behaved badly." Actually of course the Government suggested to the Paramount Chief that they should be removed, and he acted on that suggestion. Yeta was also asked to remove Daniel Kufuna and refused to do so. Presumably he could also have refused to remove the two Indunas.
The Lunda and Lovale however, had been told that Sakavungu and Peter Dawson were to take no further part in politics. Actually they did so, and it is a grievance of the Marozi that they removed these two Indunas on request, but that the Lunda and Lovale did not keep to their side of the bargain.
At the meeting between the Acting Governor and the Lunda, on Page 1 Shinde said "I never came from Portuguese Territory at all." Before the Commission he has admitted that he was born on the Lufwize which is in Portuguese Territory. At the time that Shinde left what is now Portuguese Territory, there was no Portuguese Government in that part of the country, so that Shinde's statement is strictly true. At the same time, however, I submit that it gave a false impression.
His Excellency told Shinde that Yeta had suggested he should drive Shinde out; he also told him that "the Government
-3-
has recognised Yeta as Chief of that country." (i.e. Shinde's area). On Page 2. Shinde makes an important statement. he says "I, Shinde, was born in my own country, Balovale, and it is my country. I have lived in my own country for many years, and two of my forefathers have lived in the same country and they had no troubles from Lewanika in the old days."
Here again Shinde is trying to make out that he was born on the land in question, which is not true. When he says that two of his forefathers had lived in the same country, presumably he refers to Chikala Kanyevu and Kamala Musamba. It is extremely important to note that he only mentions two of his forefathers living in that country, because in the Lunda statement put in before the Commission, it is claimed that an earlier chief or chiefs had lived in the land under dispute.
If this claim had really been true, I submit that Shinde would have said so on the occasion now under discussion.
On page 3 His Excellency tells Shinde that "he has rendered himself liable to very severe punishment" ( for intrigue). "And now the Paramount chief says he wants him removed from the country. I must say taut I feel that it would be better." (p.4)
On Page 5 Shinde quotes Yeta as saying, when suggesting that Kufuna should go up to Balovale, that "he will come just as my chief, and the court will be a court of appeal." On page 6 Shinde says that Peter Dawson is his heir. One wonders if Shinde's constant quarrels with Shima were because Shinde wished his son to inherit, and wanted to bring Shima, another strong claimant, into disrepute with the Lunda.
The Acting Governor meets Yeta and the Marozi again, and on Page 2 says "I think we went too fast in Balovale." The use of the word "we" suggests that the Governor recognised that Government was equally responsible with the Marozi. On pages 5 and 6 the Ngambela describes the difficulty of agreeing to H.E.'s suggestion without consultation at Lealui, and H.E. replies "without an agreement I consider it is very unwise for him even to go " to England. [for the Coronation]
- 4 -
The Ngambela and Suu have told the Commission that they considered this in the nature of a threat that they could not go unless they agreed. Having explained to H.E. that their agreement without the sanction of the kuta would not be binding, they eventually gave this agreement, H.E. then met Shinde and Kambondo for the last time.
On Page 2 they are told that "if they still say "we will not recognise Yeta as the Paramount, then Yeta would say "all right, I do not agree to the rest.""
On Pages 4 and 7 H.E. makes two statements which I submit were ill-advised. He said "there will not be Barotse chiefs in their country ... they told me there were Indunas" and "I will recognise no Barotse chiefs in the Balovale district except Yeta."
The Barotse were not present when this statement was made, and there is no evidence that they were ever told that H. E. made such a statement. The Lunda and Lovale, however, went on their way rejoicing. When H.E. said those remarks he may have been thinking of the promise that Daniel Kufuna should be called "son of a chief" and not "chief", but I submit that his advisors should have pointed out to him that Sinyama Imasiku, Situmbeku, Bulamitata and Siengele had always been recognised by Government as chiefs, and that their names appear in the Government's list of chiefs published in 1930.
On Page 7 Nguvu said "the chiefs Nguvu and Situmbeku have lived in very close proximity, and I would like that Situmbeku's kingdom be taken from him and that it might be given to Nguvu." I must again call to mind the statement made by Mr. Sharratt-Horne in the Balovale district notebook, that Nguvu's proper area was near the Portuguese border. If there is conflict because Situmbeku and Nguvu live so close together, surely Nguvu, who has another area far away, is the one who should be moved if there is any question of one of them moving.
On Page 10 Mpili says "when he (H.E.) writes to the British Government in England, we ask him not to say that
- 5 -
Yeta is our Paramount Chief. We would like him to say that the British Government is our Paramount Chief, but not Yeta. We are going away with that in our hearts and our minds." H.E.'s reply was "I have said that I recognise Yeta as Paramount Chief, and I am going to recommend to the British Government that he should continue to be recognised as Paramount Chief.°
I have to point out that H.E.'s statement only says that he recognises Yeta as Paramount Chief, and I submit that this expression may have been extremely misleading to Mpili and the Lunda and Lovale. Mpili had asked him not to say that Yeta was their Paramount Chief, but H.E.'s answer does not make it clear that Yeta was to be recognised as Paramount Chief in the Balovale district. Both Lunda and Lovale recognised that Yeta is Paramount Chief of the Marozi, and I submit that the Lunda and Lovale went away thinking that H.E. had agreed with Mpili's sentiments.
These minute of the Indaba at Livingstone of 31/3/37 appear as No. 5 in Balovale political file No. 29. It appears that for a period of about 15 months the District Commissioner Balovale had no copy of the actual minutes of the Indaba. I may also remark here that the minutes of the Indaba of 19/7/37 between H.E. and the Paramount Chief on the latter's return from England, appear never to have been sent to the District Commissioner Balovale at all. It is now necessary to turn back to Balovale political file 28. No. 79. This is a minute from the P.C. to the D.C. dated 14/4/37 and marked Confidential in which the D.C. is informed of some of the points in the March Indaba.
"The Governor recognises Yeta III as Paramount Chief over the whole of Balovale District." "The promise given last August to indigenous chiefs that fines and fees collected in their countries shall be spent in their countries, was repeated and confirmed by the Governor to Shinde and Kambondo." About the resident Indunas "It is however undisputed that they
- 6 -
have been there for 37 years or longer, and cannot be arbitrarily ejected. Moreover it has transpired that they have a by no means negligible following. it is admitted by Mr. Vaughan Jones that Situmbeku has valid claims to territorial rights, as chief of an aboriginal tribe."
It was proposed to give Situmbeku a 2nd class court for the Liuwa, and Njekwa a 2nd class court for the Mankoya under him. At 80A is a letter from Wright 29/4/37, giving his opinion that Situmbeku, Kakulunda and Njekwa should have administrative and judicial powers, but that Mwenda and Makwangala should not have them,
At 80, 25/5/37, the P.C. agrees to Wright's suggestion that arms licences should be issued at the Boma. Wright then leaves the district and Addis takes his place. At 82B of 15/5/37 Addis writes to Daniel Kufuna that Shinde, on his return, made statements containing a refusal to recognise the Paramount Chief. At 82 Page 2 of l5/5/37 Shinde is reported as saying "The Governor said "your country Balovale I have given to you, but the Paramount Chief will be Paramount Chief of Balovale." We refused this statement in the presence of the Governor." This appears to show that Shinde thought he had been able to get away with his refusal to recognise the Paramount Chief.
Page 3, he says "We complain about the following people: Sinyama Imasiku, Siengele, Bulamitata, Sikufele, Njekwa, Mwenda, Makwangala, Situmbeku, Kakulunda; that they may not have a kingdom, or even be Indunas, or have districts or census books, not even in the slightest." It should also be noted that Shinde on his arrival was impolite to Addis. It appears that Shinde now wished to carry the war into the enemies quarters. Having heard H.E.'s remark that there were
no chiefs of the Marozi recognised by him, he immediately tried to take the matter a step further and eject all the Marozi in the district.
At 84, 25/5/37, we find the D.C. reporting Mpili's case with Kapeshi, a pro-Marozi. The D.C. says "I find that both parties behaved with lack of tact and in an unseemly
- 7 -
manner," Mpili had no right to arrest anyone in Shima's district, and he was fined 10/- by Shinde.
It had been the policy of Government not to stress at this stage the recognition by Shinde and the Lovale chiefs of the Paramountcy of Yeta, but this policy is now reversed, and we find in 87 a letter from Mr. Gordon Read, the new P.C., to the D.C., saying that recognition of Yeta was not to be concealed. The three conditions are:
1. Yeta to be recognised as Paramount Chief by Lunda and Lovale.
2, Lunda and Lovale to have own court of appeal with an appeal therefrom to Lealui.
3. Lunda and Lovale to issue own orders, subject only to confirmation by the kuta at Lealui.
At 90 the D.C. writes 8/17/37 to the P.C. : Even were Daniel Kufuna,, the Nawinda kuta and all Barotse Indunas to leave the district at once, would he be prepared to admit that Yeta has any authority in this district." "After two hours persuasive discussion I failed to alter Shinde's determination to refuse to acknowledge Yeta as his Paramount Chief under any conditions whatsoever.“ "I am convinced that nothing, not even coercion, will now make Shinde acknowledge Yeta as his Paramount Chief."
With regard to Ndungu's recognising Yeta's paramountcy, "I was informed that H.E. had said that the Barotse Indunas had nothing to do with the Lovale people, and that if the D.C. or anyone else were to try and force Barotse rule in Ndungu's country, he, Kambondo, had been instructed by H.E. to write and request another interview." Kucheka was also adamant.
Addis concludes this letter by saying "It is appropriate to inform you now that the feeling of the majority of the people in the south of the Lovale country, are as opposed to Ndungu's authority as she is to that of Yeta."
- 8 -
At 91, 12/7/37 is a letter from Ndungu to the D.C. This letter has Ndungu's stamp on it. She says: "1. Ngoma wants to have a part from my district ... he must go anywhere he wants. 2, Litondo is my Induna; if he wants to depart from me he ought to live (sic) my land and go somewhere he wishes to live. In my own opinion I do not like people to go away from me, but if they do not want me, they must choose to go or to live (sic) under my control." Litondo's ancestors were living in his present country before Ndungu's ancestors came into the Balovale district.
At 101A we find the D.C.'s tour report of 16/8/37. When discussing Njekwa, he says "Whatever his rights there is no doubt that many have accepted and desire to continue under his rule." Discussing Situmbeku, he says that he claimed that Nguvu, on arrival from P.W.A. was written in Situmbeku's own village and then begged from the Paramount Chief a place for himself. Situmbeku claimed forty vi1lages, and whether Liuwa or not, they "expressed in no uncertain terms that they desire to be under the Paramount Chief, and to have nothing to do with Ndungu, Kucheka, or Chinyama. Nguvu claims 21 villages of his own. Twenty four villages of Kakulunda, all want to be under the Paramount Chief."
At 102, 9/9/31 Thomas Chinyama has returned, and is taking no part in polities.
It is now time to turn to the minutes of the Indaba held at Government House Livingstone, on the 19th July, 1937. Besides H.E., Mr. Lane—Poole, recently P.C. Barotse, the Paramount Chief and the Ngambela were present; Suu was the interpreter.
In the course of this meeting, H.E. promised (Page 8) to report the whole matter to the Secretary of State, and to ask him to make a decision about the ownership of the land on the east bunk of the Zambezi. H.E. says on Page 10 "If Shinde had accepted what you have offered to him, I would, without doubt, have recommended to the Secretary of State that the whole of that piece of land should now be put into the
- 9 -
Barotse Reserve, but as he has not agreed, and as I am told now that he will never agree, then I will have to consider the question again." On Page 7 H.E. says "I said that I would be prepared to consider recommending that that piece of land in which Shinde lives should join the Barotse Reserve, if you can make arrangements which would safeguard his rights. You have tried to make those arrangements with the help of the Government, and you have accepted all the suggestions of the Government. You could not have done more than you have. But it appears, from what I am told in these reports, that no matter what you do now Shinde will not accept the position."
The Barotse had done everything they possibly could but I submit that far from receiving the help of the Government, it was a statement of Mr. Poole's as P.C. and spokesman for Governments that made it quite impossibly for Shinde to co-operate in any way with the Marozi. By telling Shinde that if he would co-operate, his land would be handed over to the Barotse, I again stress that Mr. Poole encouraged Shinde to refuse to co-operate in any way. But for that statement of Mr. Poole's, it is possible that Shinde would have agreed to co-operate, and the dispute might have been settled. and I therefore claim on behalf of the Marozi that Government must accept responsibility for the major share in keeping the dispute alive since that date.
On Page 2 Yeta had proposed that Ndungu end Kucheka should return to their homes. On Page 11 H.E. says "I have told you that as far as Ndungu and Kucheka are concerned I agree with you. Would you like me to take steps about them before we get the answer about Shinde, or shall we wait for the answer and do them all three together if the Secretary of State decides that Shinde's land is part of the 3arotse Reserve.°
Mr. Poole (Page 13) also thought it would be better to proceed at once against Ndungu end Kucheka. Then on Page 13 H.E. says "I think we must accept the advice of the Paramount
- 10 -
Chief and the Ngambela on which is the best way to do it. I will do whichever they like. If they want me to proceed against Ndungu and Kucheka, I will do so at once. If they think it would be better to wait until we get the answer about Shinde, I will wait. I suggest that that is a question that you should discuss now with the kuta and let me know which you would like to do."
Yeta replies "I agree with you, Sir, because Ndungu and Kucheka were influenced by Shinde, and if the first steps are taken against Shinde, I think it will work better, because the Balovale people from the beginning have been loyal towards me, but Shinde always held meetings inviting them to go against me and the Barotse kuta."
The Ngambela however said (P.14) "I think that steps should be taken against the two while we are waiting." H.E. then suggests that as the Paramount Chief wants one thing and the Ngambela another, they had better consult the kuta first and then give him a final answer. The Marozi then returned to Lealui. They returned in the full expectation that Government would definitely help them to remove Kucheka and Ndungu from the territory and that the matter of Shinde's eviction if he refused to acknowledge the paramountcy of Yeta, was being put to the Secretary of State for his early decision in the matter.
They have never heard anything more of these proposals, and from their point of view, they claim that there has been a definite breach of faith. What they did hear next was a proposal put to them by the P.C. on behalf of Government that they should sign a new revised Jurisdiction Agreement, under which both Lovale and Lunda were to receive what amounted to Home Rule. Somewhat naturally they declined to sign this Agreement. There could hardly have been a greater volte face than that of Government, who, having first promised to enforce the Barotse wishes as regards the Lovale, and ask the Secretary of State's permission to enforce Barotse wishes on the Lunda, at the next moment proceeded to make out a new agreement which
- 11 -
gave to these very tribes home rule.
I now return to Balovale political file 28. At 102 Shinde complains of Kalunga's court in the Chikonkwelo area. This letter is also without Shinde's personal stamp. Addis answers it in 103 of 1/10/37, and says "I would not think of allowing anyone to set up a court in your country without consulting you." The Chikonkwelo is in Sinyama Imasiku's area under the Manyinga kuta, and I submit that Addis's remark to Shinde suggesting that this was part of his country was quite without foundation in fact.
At 107 the P.C. writes to the Ngambela saying that he may not appoint Kalunga without the Governor's permission, and that Kalunga lives less than ten miles from the Manyinga first class court. At 105 D.C. to P.C. 2/10//37, Shinde wants to depose Shima. The D.C. adds "I know that Chitokoloki Mission look upon Shima with disfavour." There are also two letters filed here from Shinde, both without stamps.
At 109, 14/10/37, Shinde gives lists of chiefs under him, which includes Kanongeshya.
At 124A, 22/10/37, The D.C. Nkana writes to P.C. Western Province, enclosing a copy of a letter written by Gerimiah of Chitokoloki to Chyaze at Nkana.
We next come to the complaint of Kauya Musheta at No. 128. He was the son of the old Kakeke and he claimed that Shinde put in an old Government messenger instead of himself when Kakeke died because he had refused to go with Shinde to Lealui for the 1934 complaints. Yeta told the P.C. that Shinde was the right court to hear this case in the first instance. Shinde wrote to the D.C. 6/12/37 that Kauya cannot succeed as he had fits of lunacy and is exempt from tax paying because of it. He also says that when choosing a chief it does not matter to what family that man may belong.
At 130 of 29/11/37 Kalonga Wina write to the D.C. that Chala and five other Lunda recognise Yeta and not Shinde, and that they claim that Lewanika gave them a fishing pool.
- 12 -
At 136 the P.C. writes to the D.C. 27/11/37 and quotes Yeta as saying "It is my earnest desire to avoid any dispute regarding the rights of the Lunda chiefs, until I know the exact position of the whole affair, but I will always refer anything that comes to my notice whereby they try to interfere with my rights that ever existed." He is referring to the Kabompo fishing pools. Kamandishya states "I have been told not to take tribute any longer for the Kakonga pools as they now belong to Mpili. Mpili and his sons now come and fish in the other pools belonging to the Paramount Chief. I have several times asked them for tribute, but Mpili says "all the fish belong to me; I will not give you part as it is my land. I do not wish to give part of my fish to Yeta, or to Nawinda." Mpili has this year started to prevent non-Lunda people from fishing in these pools."
Here is an example of the Lunda having been given an inch and demanding an ell.
We next come to Shinde's attempt to remove Shima. At 138 4/12/37 Shinde writes to D.C. (no personal stamp on the letter) "If a chief or sub-chief whose conduct or character is despised by the majority of the people in his area, such a chief may be moved or discharged from the position and any other of the chief's family can take his stead without argument." "Sub-chief Shima's conduct is altogether despised by the majority of the people in his area." This area includes the Chitokoloki Mission.
This may be a good opportunity of putting forward a case for Shima. It has been said that he is sitting on the fence, but his evidence is not wholly favouring one side or the other. He has certainly been friendly to Nawinda, and he has equally certainly quarrelled with Shinde, but I submit that that quarrel was of Shinde's making. Shima's position may be put thus: of old, he stood a good chance of succeeding to Shinde on Shinde's death. By blood he is the son of Shinde's eldest brother, and his claims to the chieftainship would have been very strong indeed. By remaining friendly with the
- 13 -
Marozi and being in disfavour with Shinde, he lost his popularity with the Lunda, and with it his chances of becoming the next Shinde. If Shinde wished his son, Peter Dawson, to inherit the chieftainship, or it Peter Dawson wished to succeed, a quarrel of this nature with Shima would have been the best possible method of ensuring that the strongest rival claimant would lose his popularity with the people. It has been suggested that Shima was bribed by the Marozi, and that the bribe was the promise of the Shinde Chieftainship as soon as Shinde had been removed from the territory. No proof can be brought forward of any such bribe, and I submit that if this were a true explanation, Shima was only grasping at the shadow and making quite certain that he would lose the substance.
At 144, 14/1/38, Shinde writes to the D.C. about the long silence of the British Government, and "my enemy the Malozi."
At 146, 14/1/38, Addis as D.C. writes to the P.C. not long before his departure from the district. He says that Shinde has restrained himself and his people but that "Nawinda kuta, on the other hand, have with remarkable persistence, and with a considerable degree of subtlety, endeavoured in every way to undermine the authority of the indigenous chiefs, and to enhance that of themselves and of the Marozi Indunas. I consider it expedient to substantiate these remarks." He goes on to do so by quoting five incidents. He says that these took place over an eight-months period, but actually they are all of them in the last three months. His censure is on the Nawinda kuta so that we can immediately dispose of two of the complaints, one of which (that of Kalunga's court) is brought up to the Manyinga kuta, and another (Kabompo fishing pools) through Lealui and the P.C. Of the remaining three complaints, one concerning the Malochazi and Chief Kakeke was brought up by Shinde and Addis seems to have accepted Shinde's version of the story and never to have asked Nawinda for any information on the matter.
- 14 -
The other two were certainly brought up by Nawinda, but in both cases concerned discontented Lunda. If these Lunda had gone to Nawinda with their complaints, it must be conceded that Nawinda was bound to bring them before the D.C. I submit that it was greatly in the interests of Nawinda to keep quiet and to avoid friction with the Lunda until the Secretary of State's decision was announced. The 'Lunda and Lovale were not, and as far as I know, never have been, informed of what was said by H.E. to the Paramount Chief on the latter's return from England in 1937. It is at least probable that Nawinda was informed, and that they were warned to do nothing to jeopardise the Marozi chances of acquiring the land. I submit that the papers in the files show that Mr. Addis had a bias in favour of the Lunda and Lovale. In this same letter, at 146, he tells the P.C. that he has seen Shinde on fourteen different occasions during the eight months he has been in the district. In the same time there are extremely few letters to and from Nawinda. When Addis wrote the remark I have already quoted against the Nawinda kuta, he also had not seen the papers of the meeting in Livingstone. If he had seen them, I venture to think that he would not have made that remark. Addis has praised the restraint of Shinde. There were at least three occasions in the same eight months where lack of restraint was shown by the Lunda. The first was when they returned from Livingstone and complained publicly to Addis that they wanted the Marozi in the district to have no positions whatsoever. On this same occasion they were impolite to Addis, The second occasion was the trouble between Mpili and Kapeshi. This was no fault of Shinde's. The third occasion was Shinde's attempt to remove Shima. Considering that the period under discussion was eight months in length, and that there was a very considerable under-current of ill-feeling between the tribes concerned, I would personally suggest that both parties are on the whole to be congratulated on their restraint.
At 149, Addis announces his departure to Shinde and Ndungu 7/2/38. Apparently he did not write to Nawinda.
- 15 -
At 150, Addis reports a meeting held with Kufuna and Kalonga Wina, etc., 20/1/38, at which Kalonga Wina said "I can only think of two disputes that I have referred to the Boma, those of Kakeke and of Chisamba (Kanyata's case). I only sent them in on the demand of the complainants. It was not a political move of the Marozi. Nawinda does not follow the practice of the Lunda and Lovale, who send in all kinds of petty complaints. We have avoided sending in a number of vexatious complaints (Chimwanga's case cited). The indigenous tribes do not treat Nawinda with respect, though we respect them, and restrain ourselves." (There followed a discussion about the hearing of certain adultery cases by Kucheka and Nawinda.)
At 151, and 151A and B, we come to a dispute between Maseka and Kapitango, with regard to fishing pools on the Lutembwe. There are letters from Chinyama Litape and Kalonga Wina, and Curtis, who has now taken Addis's place, writes to the P.C. "Kapitango has lived for a long time on this side of the Lutembwe river, and not, as stated by Sinyama Litape, on the other side.
At 152, more comp1aints by Shinde against Shima, and letters from Shima. Shinde's letter has not got his stamp on it, as usual.
At 156 the P.C. wires to the Chief Secretary, 11/3/38. The appointment of a Commission has now been decided upon, and the P.C. wires "I pointed out (to Yeta) that the terms of reference did not cover investigations into Lovale claims. Paramount Chief said that not necessary as he considered these claims dismissed last meeting Livingstone on return from England. Reference to minutes seem to confirm this."
A copy of this wire was sent to D.C. Balovale and he replies, 26/3/38, at 157 "There appears to be no indication that the decision (above) was conveyed to the Lovale chiefs." As there is no copy of the minutes of the meeting on the Balovale file, it seems almost certain that this was in fact the case.
- 16 -
There is an un-numbered letter here from Ndungu to the D.C. 25/3/38. She wished to remove Litondo and other kapasus, and wanted Kucheka to move between Mwenda and Litondo, which was obviously a political move.
At 160 we come to the enquiry into the Shinde and Shima trouble. Shinde says he "offered him a mat to sit on, which is the usual custom with sub-chiefs. He demanded a chair from me to sit on. Sub-chief Shima then went away annoyed." In cross-examination Mpili said that it was the usual custom for sub-chiefs to sit on chairs in Shinde's kuta, and it is one of Shinde's and the Lunda's main complaints of their treatment at Nawinda and Lealui that they were not given chairs to sit on.
Shima had suggested that Ndungu should try his cases, not Shima. John Kawasha, another Chitokoloki Lunda, said "Shima thinks that by adhering to the Malozi he will ultimately obtain the position now held by Chief Shinde, but all the villages in his area except seven of them have no use for him and consider that he is trying to make them a slave of the Malozi."
In tour report 2 of 38, found at 173, Curtis says "Sinyama Litape had sent down one of his Indunas to Situmbeku to tell Situmbeku that he had no authority on this side of Lungwebungu and Lutembwe rivers." The Lovale have still in mind Mr. Dundas's statement to them in Livingstone, that he recognised no Marozi chiefs in the district. Meanwhile of course, the official Marozi outlook was that Ndungu and Kucheka would be proceeded against as soon as the Secretary of State's reply about Shinde was received.
Lastly on file 28, at No. 179, the D.C. writes to the P.C. 15/5/38, Mpili told me that a man from his area had been prevented from fishing in pools on the Lealui side of the Kabompo." This seems to have been the Marozi answer to Mpili's action in preventing non-Lunda people from fishing north of the Kabompo, which has already beam noticed at 135.
- 17 -
I have now a few comments to make on some of the papers in the Balovale political file 29. At No. 1 is Shinde's revised statement for the Commission. On Page 7 Shinde Kanoka is mentioned as living on the Makondo river. There is no mention that Kaumbu lived there.
At No. 2 the D.C. reports to the P.C. the fishing dispute of Kucheka's of 9/6/38. He says "From what I have gathered so far, Kucheka claims that she has fished in these pools and the Sinono stream for many years, and that formerly the Paramount Chief's Indunas would take the fish to her and she would send them down, but latterly they took them straight to Lealui and she objects to people of Lealui district coming to fish in these pools when they have plenty of fish in their own district. At 4, two sons of Kucheka also agree that some fish from the Sinono were sent down to the Paramount Chief. It seems to me that this is clear proof that in the old days Lewanika had a claim to these pools, or alternatively that Kucheka paid tribute with fish from them. It is quite true that there is more fish in the Lealui district than there is in Balovale, so if the fish was sent down only as a present, such a present would not be a very valuable one, nor would it come into the class of things exchanged between tribes, because one tribe had plenty and the other had little or none.
I suggest that the very considerable increases in population in the Balovale district have led to the fish being only barely sufficient for the inhabitants of the district, and that this has caused the resentment of the people to having to send part of their catch to Lealui.
At 7, there is a tour report No. 5, 38, by Curtis, in which he discusses the Manyinga kuta. He says "Three Indunas Ikanjiwa, Mwanalushi and Wata Kabwasa, are certainly excellent men; they are all Marozi, and I do not think I have seen three more reliable Indunas anywhere in Barotseland; they are all keen, interested in their work, and have a great sense of tact." "In this area however the people appear to be whole-heartedly for the Marozi, whatever tribe they may belong
- 18 -
to." Chief Shinde claims that he is chief over all the area over which the Manyinga kuta now holds sway, but I consider that it would be a great pity if the Manyinga Kuta ever lost the influence that it now holds over this area.
At 8 Curtis writes 23/8/38 "the Lunda and Lochazi dispute still continues, and there appears to be increased feeling by these two tribes against each other." And at 9 Shinde writes to D.C. "I see that the area given to Samuzimu is too small for him to hold more large number of more immigrants at present state of affairs." This letter also has no stamp.
The D.C. writes to Shinde 5/9/38 and says that he has found that three men worked on Chisemba's fence without payment. This is precisely the same action to which Shinde and the Lunda had taken such exception when it was practised, as they claim, by Nawinda.
Lastly, at 20, we find a list of Shinde's witnesses. Most of these people were not actually called before the Commission as far as I can discover. We find here the last triumph of Thomas Chinyama. 26 years ago he came with Mr. Suckling as a stranger in the Balovale district. Now he has attained such an influence in the politics of the district that this obscure Lunda from another area is actually put down as the acting mpumba for Shinde before the Commission. I submit that the fact that he has acquired such an important position is definite proof of the continued interest and interference in polities which he has shown.
That concludes my summing-up of the Nawinda papers. Throughout my summing-up I have avoided as far as possible quotations from any of the Lunda and Lovale witnesses who are pro-Marozi. I wish, however, to point out that the comparatively large numbers of both Lunda and Lovale who have given evidence against the chiefs of their own tribe, does demonstrate that these chiefs are unable to keep all their people, or even all their sub-chiefs, loyal to them, and I suggest that the Lunda and Lovale will find it as difficult to control these people
- 19 -
as the Marozi have found it to control them.
Throughout the disputes of the past few years, Government has stated that it recognises Yeta as Paramount Chief of the Balovale district. The Lunda and Lovale, although they are aware of this, have refused to recognise the authority recognised by Government. I submit that if the Lunda and Lovale are taken away from the authority of the Marozi and put under that of Government, they are liable, within a very short space of time, to question the authority of Government, if Government attempts to enforce on them any measure of which they do not approve. During these years, the Marozi have worked in full concert with the Government, and as his Excellency told the Para mount Chief in Livingstone on his return from England (Page 7) "You have tried to make those arrangements with the help of the Government, and you have accepted all the suggestions of the Government, You could not have done more than you have," I submit that if the Lovale and Lunda should be taken away from the authority of the Marozi and put under that of the Government, the Marozi will consider this a breach of faith by the Government with whose help they have been attempting to govern these people. How can the Government say to the Marozi, "You have done everything possible, and taken all our advice," and then turn round and take these people and their land for themselves and away from the Marozi. If the Government of the local tribes in the Balovale district has been unsatisfactory, Government must share the responsibility for this with the Marozi. If Government is unable to advise the Marozi how to govern the district, how can it pretend to be able to undertake the government of it itself?
- - - - - - -
10th March, 1939.
On behalf of my clients and myself, I wish to express our deep and sincere gratitude to the Commissioner for the patience with which he has listened to the large number of Malozi witnesses. On my own behalf I wish to thank the Commissioner for his great kindness and consideration to me throughout the sitting of the Commission. I also wish to thank Mr. Jones, the Commission Secretary, for his ready assistance at all times, and for his conduct of the Commission in the Commissioner's absence. I have also been asked by the Malozi to thank Mr. Suckling for his very fair interpretation, which has called forth their and my admiration, and I am also grateful to him for keeping the proceedings so free from acrimony. Lastly I wish to record my gratitude to the Commission stenographer, Miss Mead, whose quick grasp of native names and uncomplaining overtime work have so greatly shortened the proceedings.
