begunstighde daerinne boven anderen te prefereren, en sulex sonder
onderscheijt tot voors: leverantie sal hebben te admitteren. Dan
aengesien wij considereren dat voorsz: leverantie onder anderen
mede moet geaght werden te sijn een voorregt der vrije Ingesetenen
en Coloniers deselve privative competerende met uijtsluijtingh van
Comps: dienaren, die met haer Soldije en emolumenten moeten te vreden
sijn, en daermede oock genoeghsaem kunnen bestaen, soo verstaen en
begeeren wij dat niemant van Comps: dienaren, den gouverneur daer
onder mede begrepen, eenigh versch vlees aen Comps: schepen, hospitael
etc: sal mogen leveren, direct of indirect, maer ’t selve op den
ontfangst deses voortaen alleen door de vrije Ingesetenen moeten
geschieden.”--Despatch signed by fifteen of the directors, dated at
Middelburg on the 28th of October 1705. In the Cape archives and
copy in those of the Netherlands. This order was sent out, because
complaints had already been received in Holland that the governor was
disregarding the laws on the subject.
[60] When trying to excuse his conduct to his friends after all this
was made known to the directors and he had been dismissed from the
service, the late governor admitted, as he could not deny it, that he
had occasionally taken Hertog with him to Vergelegen for the purpose
here mentioned. See the _Korte Deductie van Willem Adriaen van der
Stel: tot destructie ende wederlegginge van alle de klaghten, die
eenige vrijluijden van de voorsz Cabo aen de Edele Achtbare Heren
Bewinthebberen van de Oost Indische Compagnie over hem hadden gedaen_.
A foolscap folio volume of 172 pages, published in Holland--the name
of the town is not given--soon after his recall and dismissal from the
Company’s service. But his opponents proved conclusively that Hertog
was there for six or eight months at a time, while drawing pay from
the Company, and they published some of his written orders as manager
of the place. See the _Contra Deductie ofte Grondige Demonstratie van
de valsheit der witgegevene Deductie by den Ed: Heer Willem Adriaan
van der Stel, Geweezen Raad Extraordinaris van Nederlandsch India,
en Gouverneur aan Cabo de Goede Hoop, etc., etc., etc.; waar in niet
alleen begrepen is een nauwkeurig Historisch Verhaal, van al ’t geene
de Heer van der Stel in den jare 1706 heeft werkstellig gemaakt, on
de Vrijburgeren aan de Kaab t’ onder te brengen: maar ook een beknopt
Antwoort op alle in gemelde Deductie, en deszelfs schriftelijke
Verantwoordinge, voorgestelde naakte uitvluchten, abuseerende
bewysstukken, en andere zaken meer: strekkende tot Verificatie van’t
Klachtschrift, in den jare 1706 aan Haar Wel Edele Hoog Achtbaarheden,
de Heeren Bewinthebberen ter Illustre Vergadering van Zeventienen
afgezonden; zynde gesterkt door veele authenticque en gerecolleerde
Bewysstukken, waar van de origineele of authenticque Copyen in handen
hebben de twee Gemachtigden van eenige der Kaapsche Inwoonderen
Jacobus van der Heiden en Adam Tas_. A foolscap folio volume of
318 pages, published at Amsterdam in 1712. This volume refutes the
statements made in the _Korte Deductie_, and contains some very strong
evidence given under oath. It is otherwise interesting, as being the
first book entirely prepared in South Africa.
[61] In his _Korte Deductie_ the late governor asserted that he had
purchased over two hundred slaves for his private use. The Company
allowed him twenty of its male and female slaves as domestic servants
in his residence in the castle, and these he sent to his farm,
employing his own instead. He denied making use of other government
slaves than these for his private work. He stated that the soldiers
and sailors were temporarily detached from the public service, in
the manner usual in times of peace, and were paid and maintained by
him while they were in his service. The only other soldiers that he
admitted as having worked at Vergelegen were those who formed his
escort when he went there, and who, he asserted, might better have
been occupied during their stay at the farm than have been idle. But
see the note on page 218.
[62] The quantity of wheat produced at Vergelegen is not given in the
archives, but is stated by Bogaert, who is a trustworthy authority, at
over eleven hundred muids yearly.
[63] In his _Korte Deductie_ he stated that by purchasing from farmers
and by the natural increase of his stock he had some thousands of
sheep and some hundreds of horned cattle, but that he did not know the
exact number. Instead of eighteen stations, he asserted that he had
eight folds or kraals, but that part of his attempted excuse for his
conduct is so palpably misleading that it is of no value whatever. The
statistics given here are from those obtained after his recall.
[64] “Ondertusschen sullen uE: haer mede op hoede hebben te
houden.”--Despatch signed by twelve of the directors, dated at
Amsterdam on the 15th of March 1701.
[65] He was able to prove that he had paid for some timber drawn from
the Company’s magazine, but the evidence of the master of a ship shows
how articles could be obtained even where invoices and disbursements
were audited. The skipper of one of the Company’s vessels needed a
small quantity of iron for repairs, which he drew from the magazine.
Before he sailed he was required to sign a receipt for a very much
larger quantity, and on his remonstrating he was told that such was
the usual custom. He grumbled, but was at length induced to attach his
signature to the document. The receipt then became a voucher for the
use of so much iron in the Company’s service. Willem Adriaan van der
Stel was a poor man when he arrived in South Africa, and could not
have established Vergelegen with his own means, although he received
large bribes for favours granted. In Tas’s journal it is stated that
from the contractor Henning Huising he obtained three thousand sheep,
two slaves, and over £833, but no particulars are given as to the
nature of the transaction. The bribers may be morally as guilty as the
bribed, but with such a man as Willem Adriaan van der Stel there was
no other way of getting any business transacted.
[66] Such extreme precaution was used to prevent the governor’s
movements from becoming known in Holland or India that it is now
impossible to ascertain from any documents in the archives which
of these statements is correct. The long intervals that frequently
occurred during his administration between the meetings of the council
of policy, however, prove that the periods named by the burghers
were quite possible. In 1700 there was one meeting in January, four
meetings in February, one in March, one in April, one in May, one on
the 28th of June, one on the 30th of August, and one on the 18th of
December. In 1701 there was one meeting in January, three meetings in
March, one on the 26th of May, one on the 29th of August, and one on
the 30th of December. In 1702 there were only six meetings in all, the
first being on the 23rd of May, in 1703 there were only five meetings,
and in 1704 the same number. In 1705 there were ten meetings, with an
interval of two months in one instance and of nearly three months in
another. This is not very important, however, as the time of absence
from his post admitted by himself is sufficient to convict him of
unfaithfulness to his trust.
[67] This grant was of course illegal, as being in opposition to the
orders of the directors in 1668, and Elsevier’s making use of it
was the ground of his dismissal from the service when the directors
became acquainted with the circumstances. There is so little on record
concerning it that it is not now possible to say why Simon van der
Stel acted as he did, but he may have reasoned that as the lord of
Mydrecht would have given ground to the secunde in 1685, if the holder
of the situation at that time had chosen to accept it, it would not be
wrong to give it to another secunde. This is only supposition, but I
cannot think of anything else that would have caused the old governor
to overstep his authority in this manner.
[68] See letter from the reverend Petrus Kalden to the Classis of
Amsterdam, dated 26th of April 1707, given in _Bouwstoffen voor de
Geschiedenis der Nederduitsch-Gereformeerde Kerken in Zuid Afrika_,
door C. Spoelstra, V.D.M. Volume I, page 56.
[69] For these statistics see the sworn depositions of men who had
worked for him, printed in the _Contra Deductie_. The charge of not
paying the Company its legal dues he took no notice of in his attempt
to excuse his conduct, and there is not the slightest trace of such a
payment being made in the accounts or other records of the time. The
names of over sixty of the Company’s soldiers and sailors who worked
for him for considerable periods are given under oath in the _Contra
Deductie_, and of them he only accounted for twenty-eight as being
paid by him. There is positive proof of his using the Company’s slaves
on his farm, but the charge of taking twenty-five for himself and
causing them to be written off in the Company’s books as having died
must be regarded as doubtful. That the Company’s master gardener, Jan
Hertog, was the overseer at Vergelegen, that the workmen there were
under his direction, and that he was not away from the place for eight
months at a time, was fully proved.
[70] See the _Contra Deductie_, pages 126, 180, and 279. Kolbe states
that his wife attempted to commit suicide on account of his conduct,
but I would be disinclined to accept the evidence of that author
unless it was well supported. Tas, however, in his journal, states
on information supplied to him that in December 1705 the governor’s
wife tried to drown herself by jumping into the fountain behind her
residence at the Cape, and that Mrs. Bergh sprang forward and drew her
out of the water. She complained that life was a misery to her, owing
to what she was obliged to see and hear daily. Of Mrs. Van der Stel
so little is known that it would not be right to express an opinion
as to whether her conduct towards her husband was or was not such
as to provoke him to neglect her for other women, but this can be
said with confidence, that the man who was utterly faithless towards
his country, his rulers, and one who was weak enough to trust him
as Wouter Valckenier had done, may without hesitation be pronounced
capable of being equally faithless towards the mother of his children,
the most unhappy woman in the settlement.
[71] This charge can neither be proved nor disproved by any documents
in the Cape archives. But there is one circumstance in connection
with it that throws strong suspicion upon the governor, and under any
circumstances shows that he paid no attention to the instructions of
the authorities in Holland. Their orders of the 27th of June 1699,
throwing open to the burghers the cattle trade with the Hottentots,
reached Capetown on the 24th of November of the same year; having been
brought by the flute _De Boer_, which sailed from Texel on the 17th
of July. The governor did not return to the castle from his visit
to the Tulbagh basin until the 14th of December,--all his movements
when absent on duty are carefully recorded,--and a placaat announcing
the will of the directors ought to have been issued on the following
day. Instead of that, however, it was not published until the 28th of
February 1700, and then only owing to the presence of the commissioner
Wouter Valckenier. It was during these two months and a half, as
the burghers asserted, that the governor’s agents were engaged in
procuring horned cattle and sheep for him by fair means or by foul,
and that the Hottentots to a considerable distance from the Cape were
despoiled and exasperated. From his general character, as delineated
in the archives, one cannot say that he would scruple even at acts of
robbery.
[72] See letters from the governor and council at the Cape to the
governor-general and council of India, dated 18th of March 1706, and
to the directors, dated 31st of March and 24th of June 1706, in the
Cape archives. The abuse heaped upon the burghers in these documents
is enormous, and indicates how weak the governor must have felt his
attempted defence to be.
[73] This document is in the Cape archives. It is in as good a state
of preservation--excepting one leaf--as if it had been drawn up
yesterday.
[74] See the letter of the governor and council at the Cape to the
governor-general and council of India, of the 18th of March 1706.
For this and subsequent events to the governor’s recall see the
Proceedings of the Council of Policy and the Cape Journal for 1706 and
1707 in the Cape archives.
[75] One of the chief privileges secured to the free Netherlanders
by their revolt against Spain and the long and successful war that
followed was security from confinement except as a punishment for
crime. A man suspected of having committed an offence could be
arrested on a warrant properly issued by a court of justice, and was
then either released on bail or speedily brought to trial, according
to the nature of the charge.
[76] In a letter to the Indian authorities it is also termed blasphemy.
[77] “Maar Edele Gestrenge Heer, de wyven zyn alsoo gevaarlyk als
de mans, en zyn niet stil.”--Extract from a letter of the landdrost
Starrenburg to the governor Willem Adriaan van der Stel, dated 18th of
September 1706. In the Cape archives.
[78] See letter from the governor-general and council of India to the
governor and council at the Cape, dated 30th of November 1706. In the
Cape archives.
[79] Tas mentions in his journal under date 19th of June 1705 that
he had heard of complaints about the governor having reached the
Netherlands, but gives no particulars.
[80] “Tot het stellen van de nodige ordres voor de securiteijt van de
Caep de bonne Esperance, en daer toe soodanige middelen te adhiberen
en in ’t werck stellen, alsmede tot bereijkingh van dat ooghmerck
sal nodigh en dienstigh aghten, is goetgevonden te versoecken en
committeren, gelijck als versoght en gecommittert werden bij dese,
wegens de kamer Amsterdam de heeren Witsen en Hooft, wegens de kamer
Zeeland de heer d’Huijbert, en wegens de kameren van ’t zuijder en
noorder quartier de heeren van Blois en van Gent, beneffens beijde d’
advocaten van de Compagnie.”--Resolution of the Assembly of Seventeen
adopted on the 8th of March 1706, copied by me from the original
volume in the archives at the Hague, and published in _Belangrijke
Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika_, Deel III, page 3.
[81] See _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika_, Deel
III, page 7.
[82] See _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika_, Deel
III, page 7.
[83] They can be seen in the letter of the governor and the council of
policy to the directors, dated 31st of March 1706, in the archives at
the Hague and copy in those at Capetown, also in the printed volume
called the _Korte Deductie_.
[84] These rations included three hundred and sixty pounds of flour, a
still larger quantity of rice, fresh meat equal to four sheep, twenty
pounds of salted beef or pork, a very large quantity of European wine,
ale, and spirits, oil, vinegar, four pounds of pepper, two pounds of
spices, and twenty-five pounds of butter monthly, besides twenty-five
pounds of wax and tallow candles, and as much fuel as he needed. He
was supposed to entertain the masters of ships when they were ashore
on business, and was therefore provided for so liberally. He was
also required to give a dinner to all the principal officers of the
fleets returning from India, just before they sailed, which was termed
the afscheidmaal, but for this he was paid £41 13_s._ 4_d._ by the
Company. A carriage and horses were also provided for him free of
cost, so that he had no forage to purchase. Under these circumstances
his excuse seems to be as silly as it was impudent. His actual salary
was only two hundred gulden or £16 13_s._ 4_d._ a month, less than
that of a second class clerk in the public service to-day, but he had
various fees and perquisites.
[85] The other members were Messrs. Lestevenon, De Vries, Corven, Bas,
Hooft, Van Dam, Velters, De Witt, Van der Waeijen, Van de Blocquerij,
Hoogeveen, Muijssart, Maarseveen, Trip, and Goudoeven. For the actual
text of the resolution see _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over
Zuid Afrika_, Deel III, pages 7, 8, and 9.
[86] The original letter is now in the Cape archives, and the office
copy is in the archives of the Netherlands at the Hague.
[87] This appointment of a military man as head of the government was
made specially to secure his constant presence in the castle in time
of war, as the directors were startled by the conduct of Van der Stel
in neglecting his duty as he had done.
[88] _Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden_, door A. J. van der
Aa, Zeventiende Deel, Tweede Stuk, published at Haarlem in 1874.
Copied by me and published in _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over
Zuid Afrika_, Deel III, pages 11 and 12.
[89] Better known to English readers as Moselekatse, the Setshuana
form of his name. He was the father of the late chief Lobengula.
[90] The private, confidential, and semi-official correspondence
between Governor Sir Benjamin D’Urban, Colonel H. G. Smith,
Lieutenant-Colonel H. Somerset, and many others, was fortunately
preserved by the governor and remained in his family’s possession
until 1911, when it was most kindly presented by his grandson W. S.
M. D’Urban, Esqre., of Exeter, through me to the government of the
Union of South Africa. I immediately published one volume of these
most valuable papers under the title of _The Kaffir War of 1835_,
which can be seen in several of the most important public libraries
in Great Britain and the Netherlands as well as in those of South
Africa. I copied sufficient for two volumes more, which can be seen
typewritten in the South African Public Library, Capetown, under
the title of _The Province of Queen Adelaide_, and finally I am now
preparing another packet, under the title of _The Emigration of the
Dutch Farmers from the Cape Colony_, which will also be deposited in
the same institution. It is from these papers that I have derived the
information which enables me to enlarge upon the accounts of Louis
Triegard and Pieter Lavras Uys which I have given in my _History of
South Africa_. I am also indebted to G. C. Moore Smith, Esqre., M.A.,
of Sheffield, a great nephew of Colonel (afterwards Sir Harry) Smith,
for the use of many papers in his possession and for much kindly
assistance otherwise rendered to me.
[91] He was a lineal descendant of the ruling family of the Amatuli
tribe, the remnant of which had been reduced to such a wretched
condition that they depended chiefly upon fish for subsistence. This
is an article of diet that would only be used by this section of the
Bantu in the last extremity of want, but they dared not make a garden
or even erect a hut before the arrival of Messrs. Farewell and Fynn
in 1824, for fear of attracting notice. Umnini was then a child, and
his uncle Matubana was regarded as the temporary head of the little
community of three or four hundred souls that had escaped when the
remainder of their tribe was destroyed.
[92] The petition is in the archive department, a typewritten copy
in the South African Public Library. The names attached to it are
those of A. Gardiner, Henry Hogle (elsewhere written Ogle), Charles
J. Pickman, P. Kew, J. Francis, J. Mouncey, G. Lyons, Charles
Adams, James Collis, John Cane, R. Ward, Thomas Carden, Richard
King, J. Prince, and Daniel Toohey. On the 29th of March 1836 Lord
Glenelg replied refusing to annex Natal. Other European residents,
either permanent or occasional, at Port Natal at this time were C.
Blankenberg, Richard Wood, William Wood, Thomas Halstead, J. Pierce,
John Snelder, Alexander Biggar, Robert Biggar, George Biggar, John
Jones, Henry Batts, William Bottomley, John Campbell, Thomas Campbell,
Richard Lovedale, John Russell, Robert Russell, John Stubbs, Robert
Dunn, G. Britton, James Brown, George Duffy, Richard Duffy, Thomas
Lidwell, C. Rhoddam, and G. White.
[93] When Mr. Isaacs lived in Natal--October 1825 to June 1831--the
Zulus occupied the territory between the Tugela and Tongati rivers,
but from this tract of country they were withdrawn in 1834 by Dingan.
In 1828 Tshaka was murdered at his residence there. At the port and
near the Umzimkulu the Bantu under European chiefs were living. The
remainder of the territory was uninhabited except by Bushmen on
the uplands and a few cannibals. Mr. Isaacs says: “our settlement,
which was somewhat circumscribed, contained upwards of two thousand
persons.”--_Travels and Adventures, &c._, Volume II, page 326.
[94] The people under the chief Futu, some of whose kraals were found
by Captain Gardiner on the head waters of the Umkomanz river, should
not be included in the population of Natal at that time. They were
refugees from the north, and frequently moved from one locality to
another. Shortly after Captain Gardiner’s visit they retired to the
Umtamvuna. Their chief, Futu, was the son of Nombewu, who was killed
by Ncapayi, the ferocious leader of the Bacas. Captain Gardiner
estimated the people under Futu at different places in Natal at from
seven to eight thousand souls. See pages 312 _et seq._ of his volume.
[95] See _The Annals of Natal_, by John Bird, Pietermaritzburg, 1888,
Vol. I, page 75.
[96] By a Proclamation of the 11th of September 1834 the removal of a
slave beyond the border of the colony was punishable by the forfeiture
of the slave, a fine of £100, transportation, or imprisonment with
hard labour from three to five years. It was based upon an Imperial
_Act to amend and consolidate the Laws relating to the Abolition of
the Slave Trade_.
[97] Mr. Willem Hendrik Neethling, afterwards landdrost of Klerksdorp,
who was living in Lydenburg in 1867 and was then twenty-three years
of age, in a communication to President F. W. Reitz which has been
kindly lent to me, says: “Wat betreft het verhaal re de twee Blanken
die te Lijdenburg aanlandden, is dat eene dwaling. Ik ben in staat
UEd. volkomen daarover in te lichten. Het waren geen Europeanen of
Caukassiers, maar wel Albinos van het neger ras. Zij waren man en
vrouw en twee kinderen. Het derde is te Lijdenburg geboren. De man
heette Tjaka, de alombekende slangen tegen-vergift maker. De man
was reeds op leeftijd, doch ik schatte de vrouw 27 of 28 jaren oud.
Toen het gerucht verspreid werd van de teruggevonden blanken heb ik
mij gehaast om ze zelven te zien, en vond uit dat zij Albinos waren,
zeer blank, doch met neger type, met de on-ontwikkelde neusbeen, en
kroeshaar. Zij kwamen van Kosi-baai, en zijn er weder heen vertrokken.
Ik heb se persoonlijk gesproken. Zij waren van staatswege gehaald op
geruchten.”
[98] Since the publication of my _History of South Africa_, a journal
kept by Mr. Erasmus Smit from the 15th of November 1836 to the 31st
of January 1839 has been brought to light and in 1897 was printed in
Capetown. It forms an octavo pamphlet of one hundred and eight pages.
Mr. Smit, a native of Amsterdam, had once been a lay missionary in
the service of the London Society, later a schoolmaster at Oliphants
Hoek, and was married to a sister of Mr. Gerrit Maritz. He was a man
of fifty-eight years of age and infirm in health, but he joined his
brother-in-law’s party, and left the colony with it, being engaged
to perform religious services in the camp. During the stay of the
emigrants at Thaba Ntshu he was exceedingly jealous of the reverend
James Archbell, Wesleyan missionary there, whom he suspected of a
design of wishing to supplant him. On the 21st of May 1837 Mr. Retief
appointed him religious instructor of the emigrants, whereupon he
ordained himself and thereafter administered the sacraments and
performed all the duties of a clergyman. I have found nothing in
his journal that enables me to add to the account of the emigration
given in my _History_, but there are in it a few remarks that are of
assistance to me in the preparation of this paper.
[99] The actual separation into two distinct communions, as we see
them to-day, had not then taken place, but the principles underlying
the movement were already at work, and had been for many years. There
was not as much difference between the two parties as there is in the
English episcopal church between the high and the low sections, but it
was sufficient to cause those with common sympathies to keep together
as much as they could.
[100] See pages 451 to 455 of Volume III _Geslacht Register der Oude
Kaapsche Familien_, published at Capetown in 1894. The family Uys in
1836 was a very large one, and was widely spread over the Cape Colony.
[101] See page 302 of the printed volume of records entitled _The
Kaffir War of 1835_.