Abstract

CARNELLEY, M. The 1874 Trial of Langalibalele of the Amahlubi. PER [online]. 2023, vol.26, n.1, pp.1-42. ISSN 1727-3781.  http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a16086.

This article aims to discuss the actions leading up to the trial, and the 1874 Langalibalele trial itself, by including both the perspectives of Langalibalele and the colonial government. It sets out how the acquisition of guns from the diamond fields by the flourishing and largely independent Hlubi, their Chief Langalibalele's failure to adhere to a meeting request with colonial government officials, and the killing of three British soldiers outside the colony by fleeing Hlubi created the opportunity for nervous colonists and punitive leaders in a struggling colony to escalate the unfortunate events into the slaughter of hundreds of Africans and the destruction of their property without any negative personal consequences. The results for the colonists were overwhelmingly positive: access to more land, the availability of cheap labour and improved security. Although the colonial government had the support of the colonists, questions were raised in England about the excessive bloodshed of the Hlubi and Putini tribes. After the capture of Langalibalele, his trial was an opportunity for the justification of the colonists' actions. The authorities resorted to deceitful methods and a sham and unlawful trial to ensure the intended outcome, that Langalibalele was found guilty. The article highlights the problems with the trial itself. These include that the Lieutenant-Governor had no power to establish an African court and that the choice of law was inappropriate and contrary to applicable legislation. The law and procedure applied during the trial did not adhere to any specific legal system but was a convenient amalgamation of African and Natal law. Most of the members of the bench were not independent, were clearly prejudiced and were hostile towards the accused. The charges were not in accordance with the chosen law, they were unclear, and the accused's plea explanation was erroneously interpreted as a plea of guilty. He was found guilty before any evidence was led. He had no legal representation, no right to cross-examine witnesses and no right to call his own witnesses. The evidence did not support the crimes he was accused of committing and the punishment imposed was unlawful and exceeded the powers of the court. The appeal process was fraught with intimidation and those hearing the appeal were involved in the original trial. Even after this travesty of justice had been exposed in England and discussed in Parliament, justice was not done for those who suffered the most (Langalibalele, the Hlubi and the Putini). Although Langalibalele was allowed to leave Robben Island, he was not restored as chief, the Hlubi's land and property were not restored, and the Putini did not receive their full compensation. There were some negative personal and career consequences for the unfortunate scapegoat (Pine), but also for the whistle-blower (Colenso) and the individual who unsuccessfully fought for reparations for the Putini reparations (Dunsford). The main conspirators, however, were rewarded with career advances and imperial awards (the Shepstone brothers). This saga emphasises how "gun control formed a large part of an emerging struggle over land and citizenship" and the underhand methods and exceptional power the British used to cement imperial rule. The discovery of diamonds inland increased the economic potential and political importance of the colony, resulting in better security and a more structured, but less autonomous regulatory system for Africans, their chiefs, customs and laws.

Keywords : Trial of Langalibalele; Hlubi; Putini; Natal Colony; British Imperialism.

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )