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
Accordingly, he went to Bishopstowe, and
Magema was charged to bring him in for examination on Saturday, the
next day of the inquiry. On the way into town for that purpose, Mr.
Fynn’s policeman most positively refused to let him stay, and went
off ultimately in great wrath, as Maboyi and Magema insisted that he
must give his evidence before leaving town to return to Zululand.
On that day, Saturday, August 7th, the Bishop explained the whole
affair to the Commissioner, and, having obtained a list of names
from Maboyi, requested that a Government messenger might be sent for
the men at once, and the Secretary for Native Affairs was instructed
to summon them. On Monday, August 9th, the Secretary for Native
Affairs replied that he had summoned all these men, except seven,
who were already in town, having been called by Mr. John Shepstone,
and having been, in fact, under his hands—in charge of his induna
Nozitshina—from the very first day of the inquiry. It seemed as if
William Ngidi’s statement was really to be verified, and that these
men had all succumbed to their fears. On the other hand, among these
seven was Matendeyeka, whom William Ngidi “trusted most of all;” and
there might be amongst them some who would have the courage to speak
out and to describe the facts connected with the arrest of Matshana
to the best of their ability. At all events the Bishop resolved to
call them, and do his best to bring the truth out of them; and Magema
afterwards whispered that he had heard from one of Mr. John’s men,
who was present when he spoke with the people (Kwa’ Jobe), that the
men there had said: “It was of no use to discuss it beforehand;
they would say nothing about what they remembered now; but before
the Governor they would speak the plain truth as they knew it.”
Accordingly the Bishop called four of these men—Matendeyeka, Faku
(son of Tole), Magwaza, Gwazizulu—and they all confirmed the story as
told by his other witnesses. He left the other three to be called by
Mr. John Shepstone, but he never called them. That these witnesses
should have been called by Mr. John Shepstone, as well as by the
Bishop, was satisfactory, showing that they were witnesses to whom
no objection could be made on the score of character or position in
the tribe, or as having been in any way, directly or indirectly,
influenced by the Bishop.
But the result was that, as these men were in the hands of the other
side from the time they reached until they left ’Maritzburg, the
Bishop had never even seen them, or had any communication with them,
until they appeared to give their evidence. He was wholly ignorant
beforehand of what they _would_ say or what they _could_ say; he knew
not whether they would confirm or contradict the story told by his
other witnesses; and he knew not on what particular points, if any,
they could give special evidence, and was therefore unable to ask the
questions which might have elicited such evidence.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account