History of the Zulu war and its originColenso, Frances E. (Frances Ellen)
History
History of the Zulu war and its origin
Colenso, Frances E. (Frances Ellen)
Zulu War, 1879
The native names gave a satisfactory air of justice to the
proceedings of the court in English eyes, but in point of fact they
were but dummy judges after all.
Not only, however, was the court wrongly constituted, but its
proceedings were irregular and illegal. It was called, and considered
to be, a _native_ court, but in point of fact it was a nondescript
assembly, such usages of either native or supreme court as could
possibly tell on the prisoner’s side (notably the use of counsel)
being omitted, and only those which would insure his conviction
admitted.
It was not the practice of the colony for serious crimes to be tried
before a native court. But in this case they were obliged to run
counter to custom for the reason given in a previous note, that most
of the separate charges against the chief could not be recognised
as crimes at all in an English court of law. At the same time the
sentence finally given was one quite beyond the power of the court
to pronounce. Clause 4 of the ordinance limits the power of the
Supreme Chief to “appointing or removing the subordinate chiefs or
other authorities” among the natives, but gives him no power to
sentence to death, or to “banishment or transportation for life to
such place as the Supreme Chief or Lieut.-Governor may appoint.”
When Langalibalele had been “removed” from his chieftainship, and
himself and the bulk of his tribe “driven over the mountain out of
the colony” by the Government force, as announced in the bulletin of
November 13th, 1873, the cattle within the colony seized, and many of
the tribe killed in resisting the attempt to seize them, the Supreme
Chief, under native law, had expended his power; while banishment is
a punishment wholly unknown to Kafir law, as is plainly stated in
“Kafir Laws and Customs,” p. 39.
Again, throughout the trial, the prisoner was assumed to have pleaded
guilty, although in point of fact he had merely admitted that he had
done certain acts, but desired witnesses to be called whose “evidence
would justify or extenuate what he had done,” a plea which in any
ordinary court would be recorded as a plea of “Not guilty.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account