16401. (R. RESHA)

Meadowlands and Diepkloof, and the paper proceeds s "For the first time since 1944 a full Council debate took place on the Western Areas. Despite some opposition the removal plan was adopted in principle, but the Council asked for certain safeguards. These included the adequate compensation of dispossessed owners and also th it the removal scheme should not be allowed to inter-fere with the City's Native Housing Programme, that is to meet its backlog. The Council also asked that the Councillors on the Joint Committee should continue to bo responsible to the Council, and in accordance with United Party policy it reafformed the desirability of permitting freehold in the new townships". Then the ad hoc committee modified its report along the lines of that resolution, but says the author, "This was more verbal piety. This is evident from the fact that before the Minister's response to the Council's conditions could be knovn, Meadowlands had been sold to the government in February, 1953. This meant that the government could now exercise full control over the Removal Scheme. Since then, the Minister on the 29th of July announced the appointment of an interim board of nine members to prepare the way for the removal scheme. He appointed four Councillors to this Board, but in their individual capacities. The result is that the .Yestern Areas Removal Scheme was still nominally to be administered by the City.Council, as in reality passed to the hands of the government." Now after that, Mr. Resha, that takes the history up to August, 1953. Subsequently, did the municipality continue to assist in the carrying out of the Removal Scheme? It did for somi time, but later the Council

16402. (R. RESHA)

changed as a result of the protest and consultations that were made, both by the African National Congress and the Western Areas Protest Committee.

After the municipality had stepped ~ut of the scheme, what action did the government then take? 5 Aftjr the City Council had stepped out of the scheme, the government then decided to bring about legislation to make the removal forcible.

And was that the Natives Resettlement Act of 1954? That is so. 10

That was the machinery which was subsequently used to carry out the removal? Yes.

Then the facts of the removal - of the census of 1950 are given in this brochure, and they appear at page 6. I don't propose to deal with all of them. The 15 total population for Sophiatown and Newclare is given as 53,700 and a number of families, approximately 15,500. That figure for the total population omits Martindale where the figures aren't given for thy number of persons, but the number of families are given as 2,117. Next 20 follows a classification of stands, and of a total number of 2,633 stands, it is found that 169 were vacant, 582 were in order or required only minor repairs. 388 were major slums and 1,496 are called "major-minor slums". I think later on it appears that these comprise a 25 variety of stands, the buildings on which are partially in order and/or needing reconstruction and/or demolition. The values of these properties are given, but I don't think they will particularly assist here. BY MR. JUSTICE BjKKEB : 30

The landlord-tenant position is that set out?

16403. (R. R.JSHA)

BY m . EISCHjSR ; I don't think so, My Lord.

BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF : You say the total is 2,633? And thwn the

figures 169, 582, 388, 1,496. It doesn't quite tally bat it doesn't matter. BY MR. FISCHER :

My Lords, I think that it doesn't quite tally because in the Newclare Township on this count they took into account the divided stands or something like that. I might just give the Court the value of the improvements only. They are divided up. The total is £1,459,000 •»- that is the total value of improvements, and the total value of those improvements in good order or requiring only minor repairs is £331,000 - I am leaving out the hundreds, My Lord. The major slum has a value of £152,000 and the major-minor slum properties as £975,000. Then the census included the number of stands and the value of land and improvements on the stands used for public buildings such as missions, schools, churches. The total number of stands so occu-pied was 97, and the total value of land and improvements was £99,570. Finally the census gave the number of stands with shops as follows : Sophiatown, 18^; Martindale* 170 and Newclare, 101. The next portion of the brochure contains statements by the Minister for Native Affairs in answer to questions on the 21st of July, 1953» a speech made in the Senate on the same date. It is clear from the question at the foot of page 10, that by this time the government had decided to build in Meadow-lands and that persons being moved could establish the^r

16404. (K. RSSHA)

own homos or alternatively - could establish their own houses or alternative could occupy houses built for them. The Minister gave the figure for the propie to be removed as 57,600. Far greater detail was given in a paper presented by A. J. Guttin (?). Who was he? He was 5 also a City Councillor.

Had he also taken part in the Western Areas Protest Committee? He had also taken part by addressing several meetings.

He stated thit the scheme meant moving 10 almost 60,000 people. He quoted the Minister, a speech of the 16th of June, 1952. He says this s "Minister of Native Affairs has repeatedly expressed his opposition, not to the presence of Africans in European towns, but to their ownership of land. He said there must be no 15 confusion, thinking that a location counts as a black patch. It is the ownership of land which determines whether it is a European area or not. When a European city buys a large piece of ground for housing the Natives it is wishing to employ, it is not creating a black spodrfc" 20 Now I don't need to deal with any of that further, but I pause just to point out that it contains photographs similar to those in the previous booklet showing that there were good houses and shacks co-existing which could have been improved. But this paper of Mr. Cuttin's 25 emphasises also the large number of institutional and church buildings constructed by private enterprise which constitute another important reason for retaining thet area for African occupation. Besides these institutions perform useful services for the Africans, but would never 30 assume the same significance were the area to be used by

16405. (R. RESHA)

Europeans. Besides monetary value of some £150,000 at present prices, we must take into account the immeasurable value such buildings have in creating and maintaining a social and communal life. These buildings were largely erected on the security of the freehold tenure and it is 5 doubtful whether they would be duplicated in the new i leasehold township. Mr. Cuttin's argument was that millions of pounds could be saved by a proper slum clearance instead of elimination? That is so.

Then Dr. Xuma wrote an article on - presen- 10 ted a paper on reasons against removal. Who was Dr. Xuma? Dr. Xuma is an eminent doctor and a former president-general of the African National Congress.

I don't wish to read all this, I think the arguments put forward are very largely the same arguments 15 as you have already put forward here? That is so.

And finally there was a paper presented by Professor Harris on the moral implications and I skip that too. I just turn to summarise briefly the contents - the Conference's findings. They start at page and 20 they say "This Conference convened by the Southern Trans-vaal Regional Committee of the Institute of Race Rela-tions - of the Institute, including delegates of fifty-one major social welfare organisations, churches, trade unions, student bodies, educational and women's organisa- 25 tions, makes a sincere and earnest appeal to the govern-ment to reconsider and revise the present Western Areas Removal Scheme. Conference draws attention to the fact that these towns were established early in the century and in areas for long thereafter not considered 30 desirable by Europeans. Then in the fourth resolution

16406. (R. R3SHA)

the Conference considers that there are the gravest practical objections to the scheme. The complete removal of th£ African population from the Western Areas will mean the vacating of homes in good repair to the value excluding the cost of land, of half a million pounds. 5 Properties are included which require more extensive reconstruction, the loss will be one and a quarter million. It points out why this is wrong when there is the grave existing shortage of housing. Conference records its emphatic protest against the declared inten- 10 tion to deprive African stand holders of freehold tenure. It argues that, and then it goes on to submit earnestly that overcrowding and slum conditions which exist in the Western Areas, as they do in other areas of Johannes-burg can be overcome by providing alternative accommoda- 15 tion, thereby bringing about population resettlement on a voluntary basis. In the last few resolutions it says amongst other things that it attaches great importance to the moral implications of this scheme, and emphasises that in dealing with people, whatever the colour of their 20 skin, due regard should be paid to the dignity which inheres in all human beings. It is deeply impressed by the antagonism of Africans, antagonism not confined to property owners to the proposed compulsory removal. The scheme has had the effect of spreading a deep sense 25 of insecurity among Africans, not only in the Western Areas but throughout the Union, particular in areas where freehold obtains. Finally, it believes that it is not too late to revise the scheme and substitute for it a slum clearance and voluntary re-zoning scheme. 30

16407. (R. R3SHA)

BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY I Mr. Trengove, I take it you have no objection

to this going in as evidence? BY MR. TRjjNGOVji :

I have no objection to it going in as having 5 been printed in that booklat and having been used by the people in the A.N.0. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY s

Have you any objection to accepting the factual situation concerning the population, the numbers 10 of stands, the numbers of families, the classification of those stands and the value set out therein? At the moment I don't think there will be any objection. I would suggested that the booklet as a whole be handed in as an Exhibit. 15 EX&MINATION BY TR. FISCHER CONTINUED I

You have seen the maps in that booklet, haven't you? I have.

And as far as you know are those maps cor-rect? They are, as far as I know. 20

I want to put in one other exhibit just

while I am dealing with the Western Areas Protest Commit-

tee. You told us of the efforts and the campaigns conduc-

ted by that committee. I want you to look at a Counter 25

Attack, which is the bulletin of the South African Congress of Democratsi it is dated mid-March, 1954. You told us that subsequently the municipality changed its mind, and this journal says on page 1, "Following months of intensive campaigning against the removal of the people of the Western Areas, (l) the United Party parliamentary caucus has announced that the United Party would oppose

16408. (R. RESHA)

the resettlement of Natives Bill in all its stages; (2) The chairman of the Witwatersrand United Party Council has issued an instruction that the Western Areas Removal Scheme must be boycotted by all United P~rty members? (3) Public indignation on this issue has reached tremendous heights and people of all beliefs and parties are coming forward to work on suburban protest committees. Is that the sort of thing you were outlining in your evidence? That is so.

imd then it speaks of two giant petitions, a mass meeting of the residents of the Western Areas decided to campaign to collect g.0,000 signatures? That is so.

Is that what occurred? Yes. I don't know how far the petitions went,

do you remember? Actually the intention was to send the p^A^ioaiSsto parliament, but we were late.

And then secondly there it talks of a post card campaign initiated by the Johannesburg Western ^rsas Protest Committee has resulted in thousands of postcards opposing the scheme being sent off to Members of Parlia-ment? That did take place.

Ana then it gives a description of various suburban meetings? That is so.

I want to put that in. My Lord, I suppose the first Exhibit, thj brochure would be Exhibit Z. 22 and the next would be Exhibit 2. 23. m Now Mr. Resha, I want to deal next with what the African National Congress itself did. Did it begin campaigning on a big scale in 1953? That is so.

In what way? Meetings were held and

16409. (R. RESHA)

agitation was carried on against the removal scheme. Was there a conference called in the Odeon

Cinema? Yes, on the 28th of June, 1953-What people attended that Conference?

Well, it was a Conference attended by delegates of the African National Congress from the branchesof the African National Congress in the Western Areas, members of the Transvaal Indian Congress and also members from the Ratepayers Association of Sophiatown and Newclare, Church organisations and cultural bodies.

Did this Conference take any resolutions about the Western Areas Removal Scheme? It took a resolution to oppose the removal of the Western Areas and mandated the African National Congress, the Transvaal Indian Congress and the Ratepayers Association towork out a plan of opposition.

I don't want you to deal with it now, we shall come back to this question, was anyone arrested at that C nference? At that Conference Mr. Yusuf Cachalia, former secretary of the South African Indian Congress was arrested.

I'll deal with that later. Now did the three organisations you have mentioned then Set up any committee? Yes, immediately after that Conference the thr e organis.±Lons set up an Anti-Removal Committee in Sophiatown.

Was that called - nevermind. What did the Anti-Removal Committee do? They set up offices in Sophiatown and their first duty was to cariy out a census in the Western Areas in order to ascertain the feelings of the people in the area.

16410. (R. RESHA)

When you say census, what do you mean? What information did they 'gather? A questionnaire was drawn up and people were visited house to house in which we wanted to know whether they were in favour of the removal, if so why, and if they were not in favour of the removal, why.

Who carried out that census? The census was carried out by volunteers of the African National Congress.

And what was the finding of that census? Broadly the findings were that the overwhelming

majority of the people in the Western Areas were opposed to the removal. But there were those who were in favour of the removal for various reasons.

And did they belong to any particular class People of various classes, property owners, tenants

and civil servants. I am talking about the people who were in

favour of removal? No, property owners as well as tenants.

But you say the vast majority or overwhelm-ing majority were opposed to it? That is so.

'i'hen you told us that the Resettlement Act was passed early in 1954, and that Act provided for certain notice to be given? Yes.

And for the Western Areas to be declared a separate urban area? That is so.

How did the latter pro¥ision operate in the Western Areas? Was it applied there? Yes. The - In terms of that Act the Western Areas was &d_ared a separate urban area in which the Resettlement Board was

16411. (E. EiiSHA)

then entitled to impose influx control regulations in the area. In other words, people were living in those areas, and they were then called upon to take permits, in spite of the fact that they had permits to live in Johannesburg. 5

They required separate permits, as if it were a separate town? That is so.

iind did that cause any difficulties? It caused a lot of difficulties. Firstly, this new urban area for the first time introduced the permit system in 10 Sophiatown, as a result of which there were mahy raids for permits. Secondly, people were then required to go to the offices of the Eesettlement Board, seeking permits, where they were interrogated and absurd questions were afeked in order to prove whether they had been living in Sophiatown 15 all the time.

What do you mean by absurd questions? Questions such as, in what street is the Native beerhall? Who is the oldest Chinese woman Fah-fee runner in Sophia-town. 20

Did this take up a lot of time forthe people? That took up a lot of time and it angered the people.

And when you say it led to pass raids, to permit raids, what do you mean by that? I think as a result of the Eesettlement Board being the new authority 25 in the Western .ureas, they started to raid people for permits. Those who did not hage permits from the Resettle-ment Board were then arrested.

At what time of the day did these raids take place? anytime of the day and anytime of the night. 30

I'll come back again to that too. I want to

16412. (R. RESHA)

know what was the next step taken "by the African National Congress National Executive? On the 17t and 18 of April, 1954, the National Executive Committee of the African. National Congress held a meeting in Durban.

And whatwere the decisions? The decisions 5 were firstly that the Westirn Areas Removal Scheme should now be taken by the National executive.

Taken charge of? To be under the control of the National Executive Committee.

Why wasthat done? Do you know what the 10 reasons were? Yes, the reasons were, the government had also decided that the Western Areas was now a scheme to be dealt with by the government in pursuance of its ideology of apartheid. Secondly, the African National Congress was of the opinion that the removal of the Western 15 Areas was a forerunner to oth^r removals which were going to take place throughout the country.

From other freehold areas? That is so, places like Lady Selborne in Pretoria, from areas in the Western Cape and in Natql. 20

And therefor© And therefore they felt that it was their duty to campaign against this scheme, so that if this scheme failed, the government may not carry on with the other scnemes.

Was the subsequently an evin wider threat 2 5 to Africans in the Western Province? Yes. Subsequent to that the secretary of Native Affairs, Mr. Eiselen had made a statement that 178,000 people were going to be removed from their places in the Western Cape.

That was the Africans in the Western Cape? 30 That is so.

16413. (R. RESHA)

Did the Executive at the April meeting decide broadly speaking what form the campaign should take?

The Executive decided in principle that as a protest against the removal of the Western Areas there should be industrial action. 5

And shortof industrial action, what else did it decide? It decided that the people in the Western Areas should be organised not to co-operate with the Resettlement Board. BY MR. JUSTIC j BEKKER : 10

The form of the industrial action, was that decided upon? That was only decided in principle, My lord, and it was left to the Working Committee to work it out. BY MR. FISCHER i 15

That was adopted as a principle, and another principle was that there should be non-co-operation between the people and the Resettlement Board? That is so.

In what respect did thatnon-co-operation take place? The property owners should not give information 20 to the officials of the Resettlement Board, that is they should not give the value of their property, nor should they give any information about their tenants. The same applied to the tenants. They w^re also asked not to give information whatsoever to the officials of the Resettlement 25 Board.

What about the selling of properties? ivlso the property owners were asked not to sell their properties.

The reason for that was that the scheme 30 envisaged that the Board would buy properties? That is so.

I

• 16414. (R. R^SHA)

And was there any c'decision taken as to what the Individuals, the citizens of the Western Areas should do? As I said, firstly those were the broad decisions of the National Executive. The Working Commit-tee was th^n placed in charge of working out the plan 5 of campaign.

And did that working committee have a Secretariat? The 7/orking Committee then had a Secretariat.

Wiich concentrated on this particular prob- 10 lem? That is so.

Who was on that Secretariat? Mr. Walter Sisulu, then Secretary-General of the African National Congress, Mr. Oliver Tambo, and myself.

And how long did Mr. Walter Sisulu remain 15 on the Secretariat? The decision was taken in April, and Mr. Sisulu, if I am not mistaken, was banned in August of the same year.

Soho only served on the Secretariat from April to August? That is so. 20

After that it was you and Mr. Tambo? Yes. Now I think at about the same time there

was a meeting of the Joint Executives of the Congresses? In May the s$,me year there was a meeting of the Joint

National Executive of the four Congresses, to discuss 25 this scheme, and at that Conference it was decided to set up a Resist Apartheid Committee, which was to cam-paign against various measures that were discriminatory in nature.

Not only in the Western Areas? Not only 30 in the Western Areas, the Gsnp Areas for instance.

L

16415. (E. EESHA)

^o you know whether that committee- actually operated to any considerable extent? That committee did not function to any considerable extent, because it was more or less a broad co-ordinating committee of the various organisations.

I think it occasionally got out a leaflet? That is so.

From then on it was the Working Committee of the A.N.C. that was actually in charge, and I take it that the Transvaal Executive Committee had little to do with it? — — Yes, the Transvaal Executive Committee was in the same position as the other provinces as regards the Western Areas, save that it was in the Transvaal.

Did this Secretariat of the Working Commit-tee then go into greater detail with regard to the plans?

Yes, it did. I would like you to give the Court some of

the ideas which you had of which some were adopted and some were discarded? Considering the plan of campaign, against the removal of the Western Areas, the Secretariat and the Working Committee considered first the possibility of a passive resistance to defeat the removal scheme. They considered that on the day of the removal scores of Congress volunteers should be assembled at the houses where people are going to be removed, starting from the gate right around the house and inside the house.

What should they do there? They should sit there and when the police come to remove these people they should just sit down passively and leaveit to the police to carry them one by one as they opened their way, to move the people whom they had in their notices.

16416. (R. RES HA)

Was that ever proceeded with? We dropped this scheme because we feared that the police might not act in the way in which we envisaged. They might decide to baton charge the volunteers. We therefore decided to drop that. 5

Did you ever think of going to Court? After the Act was passed we hid consultations with the lawyers and were informed that it was not an offence to disobey the notice issued in terms of the Resettlement Act. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF 5 10

What Notice was that? In terms of the Act, My Lord, the Resettlement Board had to issue notices to people whom they wanted to move to Meadowlands. Now we were told that in terms of the Act...

What did the notice say? The notice 15 said you will be moved to house No. so and so in Meadow-lands on such and such a day.

You will be moved? Yes, by the Resettle-ment Board.

And the opinion given to you was that it 20 was not an offenc^ to disobey the notice? It was not an offence, My Lord.

In what way to disobey? If you did not move on the day on which you were required to do so. BY MR. FISCHERThat was because there were further 25 rovisions that if there was a failure to move, then an order had to be obtained from the Magistrate, and then ejectment took place on that order. That was how it wo r ke d.

I was really talking of whether you gave any 30 consideration to taking the government to Court on the

16417. (E. RESHA)

the whole of the scheme? Yes, that was considered and I think the opinion of the lawyers was that we would not succeed.

Go on and tell us what you did work out? The plan then worked out, having gone into the Act itself, 5 was that on the day of the removal, having of course called upon the people not to co-operate with the govern-ment whatsoever, the people were then asked not to move on the day they are called upon to do so by the Resettlement Board, and that would therefore necessitate the Resettle- 10 ment Board going to a Magistrate to seek an ejectment order, and when the order was made, the police would then

come and say to the person, in terms of this Act you are now to leave this house. We said to the people, even at that stage, they should not co-operate with the Resettle- 15 Board. In other words, they must not load their property onto the lorries, nor must they themselv3s get onto the lorry. It must be the duty of the Resettlement Board to do all that work, even to the extent of carrying the man onto the lorry, and also to the extent of it being an 20

offence to refuse to go and that the man should face the consequences. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKK-SR ;

I don't quite follow this. To the extent that it should be an offence...? We anticipated My 25 Lord that two things would happen. One is that if you refuse to move, the officials of the Resettlement Board will load your property onto the lorry...

I follow that, but what I am not quite sure • about is....? Failure, My Lord. If one says, I am 30 not moving when the police called upon him to do so, he

16418. (R. RESHA)

may be arrested. BY.MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF ;

Notwithstanding the opinion...? No, My Lord, this is the second stage. The first stage, My Lord, 33 that you are givjn a notice to move to Meadowlands by a certain date.

That you have to move? That you have to move.

You yourself have to move? Yes, that is right, and the Resettlement Board of course will provide you with transport. You disobey that. The Resettlement Board will then have to go to Court to get an ejectment order. They would then come back to execute that order, and you refuse to go. We say then at that stage, two things were likely to happen, that is, (l), the Resettle-ment Board will make it a duty, using the police of course to load your property and to load you onto the lorry. Alternatively they will arrest you for disobeying the order. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY :

That was made an offence? That was an offence.

Not to obey a Magistrate's Order? That is so, My Lord. BY MR. FISCHER ;

I am not sure, My Lord, whether it was an offence, but in any case it would be contempt of Court. BY MR. JUSTICE EUMIFF :

Did the Act not authorise the Board to remove....

16419. (E. EESHA)

BY MR. FISOHoE : It couldn't take the law into its own hands,

My Lord. Did you visualise that the volunteers would play any part in this? We realised, My Lord, that it would he difficult for the persons who were going to be removed 5 perhaps to carry out this scheme as we envisaged it. We also therefore planned that the people who were going to be removed, should have with them the volunteers, who will be their guardians, and who will be able to say look, we think you have demonstrated your unwillingness to go, you 10 can now get onto the lorry. They would be the people to guage the situation and sea to what extent the unwilling-ness could be demonstrated.

If - that was to give some sort of local control at th. various houses? That is so. 15

You say that you also considered the question of industrial action? Yes.

Was that worked out in any detail in 1954? No.

BY MR. JUSTICE BUMPFF s 20 Was the decision of the National Executive on

the question of industrial action a decision involving national industrial action? Y- s, My Lord, on a national scale. BY MR. FISCHER ? 25

Was that conveyed to the members generally? No, it was not conveyed to the numbers generally,

because the N ti< nal Executive was labouring under the impression that it was an offence to call for industrial action, so that it - the directives that went to the 30 branches and to the provices were to propagate against the

16420. (R. RESHA)

removal of the Western Areas, and to prepare the people for an action, without saying what the action will he and wait for further instructions.

To wait for further instructions? Yes. Then in June there came the.call from Luthuli 5

for the fifty-thousand volunteers? Yes. I think that has been dealt with, that was

made at Uitenhague on the 26th of June? That is so. And I think we have had also sufficient

description of what the purposes were for which the 10 volunteers were to be used. They were to be used for the Congress of the people all over the country, and to work with regard to Western Areas in the Western Areas itself? In the Western Areas and all over the country. Because; throughout and in the various areas, Congress 15 volunteers and Congress people were to propagate against the removal. \

That is to say to make propaganda? Yes. \ In the Western Areas itself, what wire the j

duties of the volunteers? The duties of the volunteers 30 in the Western j'.reas, quite apart from conducting the census, were to distribute leaflets, to distribute pamphlets, to call meetings, to address meetings, and to do whatever work :hey were called upon to do by the local branches. 25

How many volunteers - first of all, would you tell me how manymembers the Sophiatown branch had in 1954? In 1954 the membership of the Sophiatown Branch was 1,911 paid up. Perhaps I should explain this. Every year Congress members had to pay the yearly sub- 30 scription, and we usually count our membership on the

16421. (R. R.JSHA)

paid up members, not on those who have not paid their membership for that particular year, so that if my memory serves me well, the membership of the African National Congress in Sophiatown in 1954 was 1,911*

Can you tell the Court how many viLunteers were recruited there? There were 300 volunteers recruited. BY MR. JUSTICE EEKKER ;

Is that only Sophiatown or only Western Areas? What was the total number in Western Areas as

such? The numbers I have given now are only for Sophiatown only, My Lord.

In regard to the whole of Western Areas? Perhaps I should say My Lord that insofar as the

African National Congress is concerned Martindale and Sophiatown are considered as one area. Newclare was a different branch, and I think the membership of the Newclare branch in 1954 was 800 and volunteers were between 100 and 150. BY MR. FISCHER ;

While I think of the matter, did you ever use volunteers from other areas in Sophiatown? Very rarely, My Lord. The only time I remember we have used volunteers #rom other areas ®as on the 11th of J\ily, 1954, when Chief Luthuli was supposed to have addressed a meeting in Sophiatown.

You then had some volunteers...? We had volunteers from G-ermiston, Alexandra Township, Orlando and Benoni I think.

You have told us what the duties of the volunteers were supposed to be. Did they in fact carry

16422. (R. RESHA)

out those duties? They carried out those duties. They distributed leaflets, called meetings

and addressed meetings and so on? That is so. They took the census which you talked about?

Yes. 5

Would you give the Court some idea of the number of meetings that were held and where they were held during this period of campaigning? The meetings were held at a square in Sophiatown, which is at corner of Victoria and Morris Street every Sunday during that 10 period. Meetings were also held in a hall, corner Meyer Street and Victoria Road evary Wednesday during that period. During the height of this campaign I should imagine between April, 1954 and September, there were corner street meetings during the week which were held. 15

So that there were then more than two

meetings a week? There were more than two meetings. Did you attend these meetings? I atten-

ded most of these meetings. Did you speak? I spoke at most of them. 20 And were the police present at these meetings?

So far as I can remember, police were present at all those meetings and invariably they took notes.

Towards the end of 1954 had you people any hopes about what the government was going to do? Yes. 25 Towards the end of 1954 we were of the opinion that the government was going to drop this scheme. Firstly we had expected that immediately after the Act was passed the government would start moving the people immediately. When that was not done and the government in the latter 30 part of the year said that people will not be moved to

16423. (R. RESHA)

Meadowlands untul sufficient houses had been built, we entertained the hope that the scheme might be dropped

That hope was disproved in December of 1954? That is so BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER ; 5

When did the government intimate that it would not move until the houses had been built? Firstly a statement was made in parliament, if I remviiber well, on the 22nd of August, 1953 by the Minister of Native Affairs, when he said that houses will be built in these areas, or 10 housing space would be made available for those who wanted to build their houses, and in 1954 when the government said the people were not going to be moveduntil sufficient houses had been built, already there were houses that were built in Meadowlands. 15

BY MR. FISCHER 5 when were the first notices served under the

Act? The first 150 notices were served on the 27th and 28th of December, 1954.

And these notices call id upon the people to 20 move at what date? These notic s called upon the people to move as from the 7th of February, 1955 to the 12th, so that the 12th was D-Day.

The 12th was the last day? Yes.

statement about the question of offences being committed? At the bottom of these notices there was a notice

that failure to remove on the 12th of February, 1955, will be an offence and the offender was liable to a sentence of six months or C100, something to that effect, 30 I am not sure of the amouht, but it was an offence.

These - did these notices contain any 25

16424. (R. R.3HA)

And you had been advised that that was untrue? We were advised that that was not true, and in fact.subsequent to the notices a statement was made by Mr. C. W. Prinsloo, the Chief Information Office of the Native Affairs to that effect, that failure to move 5 was an offence.

^nd what did you people do as far as the campaign was concerned after these notices arrived? '/hen these notices arrived we sent out volunteers to find out the people who had received these notices, and also 10 to inform them that it was not true that it was an offence to disobey this notice.

Was that the advice you gave them? Yes. And do you know whether any further advice

was given? Yes, My Lord, we continued to inform the 15 people not to co-operate with the Resettlement Board, to disobey the notice on the 12th so that the Resettlement Board must go to Court. We had also made our plans of having our volunteers with the people who were going to be moved on the 12th of February, 1955. 20

Was there ever any question of any sort of violent resistance? Not at all, My Lord, that was never considered at all. BY :IR. JUSTICE KUMPFF ;

What did the volunteers h ve to do on that 25 day? The volunteers on that day, My Lord, were going to be with the people who were going to be moved.

Why? Because we Were calling upon the people to disobey the order, and not to co-operate with the government. 30

That you had done for months now? Yes, but this was the day on which....

16425. (R. RESHA)

Why were the volunte-ere supposed to be there? The volunteers were supposed to be there My Lord because we felt it was necessary for our plans to be carried out as efficiently as possible and without any trouble. 5

What plans? The plan of people refusing to leave voluntarily.

Did the volunteers have to assist the people not to leave voluntarialy? The volunteers were not going to assist the people, but they were going to be there 10 as advisers to the people.

On what did they have to advise them? They had to advise the people at what stage they should

But the people had been told not to go? 15 The people had been told not to go.

•"•nd you were expecting the people to be picked up...? That was one of the things that could be done.

Now, how do you m^an the volunteers hadto 20 advise them at what stage they had to go? The position was this, My Lord, that when a man said I am refusing to go, I do not want to go to Meadowlands, thd Resettlement Board, with the police would do one of the two things. Take the property, load it onto the lorry, handle this 25 man by the scruf of his neck and throw him onto the lorry. 'There there was a possibility of the man resis-ting physically, and we wanted all volunteers to be there.

To do what? To see that this man does 30 not do that.

16426. (R. RESHA)

So they were there to help the police? They were there to carry out our plans, My Lord. BY MR. FISCHER s

My Lord, with respect, I don think BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF ;

Well, in a way....? We don't help the police at all, let me make this clear. We have nothing to do whatsoever with the police, but we are not going to refrain from doing the right thing because it appears to be assisting the police. 1J0

ii.m I then correct in this that you say the volunteers were there to see that if the officials whoever were there to remove the people, when they take the people and put them onto the lorry, to see that the people removed do not resist? Yes, and even if the volunteers see 15 that the police are likely to assault, they advise the people rather to obey than wait until they are assaulted. BY MR. FISCHER s

We will deal at considerable length with the possibility of police violence a bit later in your state- 20 ment. Were you people afraid that the police might adopt violent methods? We were afraid that the police might adopt violence.

Htuve you - had you any idea of doing any-thing else but trying to avoid that? No, our idea was 25 to avoid violence, at all costs.

On the oth^r hand, Mr. Resha, is it easy to persuade an African family to say No, if a policeman comes to the door and says you must go now? It is not easy at all. 30

Was it contemplated that there would be a

k

16427. (B. BeSHA)

lot of volunteers at each house? It was contemplated that there would he enough volunteers to advise the person, ahout or two or three volunteers.

You also I think then considered again the question of industrial action? Yes. Early in January 5 after the notices were issued , we then considered the possibility of implementing the industrial action.

What was the day of the week of the 12th of February? It was on a Saturday.

Did that have an effect on your plans? 10 That had an effect on our plans.

Would you tell the Court what your plans were? In the middle of January the Working Committee decided that on the 12th of February there should be a stay at home in the Western Areas, and that throughout the 15 country there should be a stay at home on Monday, the 14th February. In other words, the people of the Western Areas were going to stay at home on Saturday and the Monday, and their stay at home on Saturday the 12th was going to be a kickoff for the stay at home throughout the 20 country on the 14th.

Thut was to be the signal for staying at home on the Monday? Th it is so.

And what was to happen on the Sunday? On Sunday mass protest meetings and prayer meetings were 25 to be organised throughout the country, so that at these meetings the people then would be told that the people of the Western Areas stayed at home yesterday. We now call upon you to stay at home on Monday the 14th, in sympathy with the people of the Western Areas. 30

I want you to summarise briefly what in

16428. (R. RESHA)

your view is the distinction between a stay at home and a strike? Why has the African N tional Congress agitated at times that there should be stay at homes? My Lord, perhaps the stay at home is a unique form of action, in that it is different from an industrial action. In an 5 industrial action...

When you say industrial action you mean a strike? I mean a strike, yes. There you have pickets, you have demonstrations, you have processions, at the factory or at the workplace. Now becaus of the laws of 10 this country, such as the Riotous Assemblies Act which may ban meetings and processions, the Suppression of Communism Act. which may do the same thing, the Settlement - the Native Settlement of Labour Disputes Act, which may be an offence for people to strike, it was decided that the best 15 way is a stay at home, also the advantage of a stay at home is you don't meet the police. The present government always uses the police whenever there is a strike. All our strikes in this country for the last ten years, there hav~ always been policethere to break the strike. 20

So that, by a stay at home wo avoid all those things, DS C<3X1 SO cl man remains in his house. That is why we prefer stay at homes to strikes.

I want to ask you wh.ther a stay at home is an easy operation to organise? My Lord, I have 25 found it to be the most difficult form of action to embark upon, particularly in this country, because not only does a worker lose his job for not going to work, but he is also likely and invariably is endorsed cut of town, he loses his house and parts with his family. 30

You mean those are weapons which can be used?

16429. (R. RESHA)

Those are weapons which can be used, so that it is the highest form of struggle, which calls for a man who is conscious politically to undertake a stay at home, because of the consequences of a stay at home.

Is there also a difference between the 5 objects when a stay at home is a political stay at home and the objects where a strike is a straightforward strike?

That is so. Would you just comment on that, please?

A strike is when workers are either dissatisfied with 10 tneir conditions of work, or want higher wages.

That is the specific object which they have in mind? W-.ich they want to achieve immediately. Where-as a stay at home is a political action, which does not - we don't always achieve what you want to get, but you 15 do demonstrate your resentment of a particular Ac~{/or your protest to certain legislation, by staying at home. N Now in order to get people to make that demonstration, what - of what have you to persuade them?

You have to persuade them, you have got to make them 20 politically conscious. They have got to see the gains of a stay at home in a political sense.

And be prepared to take the .....? Be prepared to take the consequences and the risks involved.

Now just briefly, in your experience,9 35 what stay at homes hare there been in South Africa? Well, I think the stay at homes that have been in this country since 1950, th.re was the 1st of May, 1950 in the Transvaal...

In the Transvaal only? Transvaal only. 30 When you say in the Transvaal, do you mean

16430. (R. RESHA)

the whole of the Transvaal? I really mean the main centres, Johannesburg and the Reef including Pretoria. I don't think we ever had a strike which goes right through the province, but by the Transvaal we mean the main centres.

And that was the 1st of Kay? Yes, the 1st of May, 1950. And there was the 26th of June, 1950, which was a strike throughout the country. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF :

Are those the two days that you referred to yesterday? Th t is so, My Lord. BY MR. FISCHERDh

When you say throughout the country, be a little bit more specific? Yes, perhaps I should put it this way, thet although the stay at home was aimed for the entire country, we only had success in the main centres such as Port Elizabeth, Durban, Pietermaritzburg, Johannesburg, which to our knowledge were quite good. There were centres which were quite fair, like Grahamstown Bloemfontein and Ladybrand. There may be one or two which I am forgetting, but again when we say nationwide we really refer to the main centres throughout the country.

Does a stay at home sometimes succeed in one centre and cn another occasion fail at the same place? Th t is so, My Lord.

Do you remember any others? Yes, on the 7th of May, 1951, there was a stay at home in the Capo called by the Coloured People.

You m3an in Cape Town? In Cape Town, Cape Western, in protest against I think the Separate

16431. (R. RESHA)

Representation cf Voters Act or something. Any other? On the 7th - rather on the

10th of November, 1952, there was a stay at home in the Eastern Cppe which was called as a protest against the banning of meetings in the Eastern Gape, particularly Fort Elizabeth and Uitcnhague and introduction for the first time in those areas of the curfew regulations.

Any other? I think in 1957, if I am not making a mistake, the 26th of June, there was a stay at home in Johannesburg only, which was a great success.

That was aimed at what? That was a pro-test against passes, mainly, the Group Areas .act and also a demand for the £1 a day minimum wage for every worker.

Any other stay at home? There was anothe stay at home called by the Congresses on the 14th, 15th and 16th April, 1958, that was the longest I think we have ever called one, which was a flop, that was not successful

That was the time at - of the general elec-

tion? That was the time of the general election. What occurred there? Did anybody stay at

home? Well, the Western ureas, particularly Sophiatown stayed at home for the three days, it was a success there.

.anywhere else? — Nowhere else. It was called off on the firs- day.

Although the Congress had endeavoured to call it nationally? That is so.

Those then are all the stay at homes that have occurred? Yes.

And the extent to which they were success-ful? That is so.

16432.

What did you do about announcing the stay at homes for the 12th and 14th of February? Did you makj that public? No. What we did was, that having taken the decision in the middle of January, the Working Committee then sent out Mr. Hutchinson to the Cape, to meet the Provincial leaders there and I was sent to Natal.

Do you know whether Mr. Hutchinson went? He started at Bloemfontein and met the provincial leaders.

I t hink thisis all hearsay? He did give us a report at any rase.

You went to Natal? Yes, I went to Durban iind did you speak to...? I met members

of the committee of the provincial committee of the African National Congress.

^nd did you ask them to co-operate? - — I asked them to co-operate.

And what did they say they would do? '/ell, they said they would do their best, Jgut at the time they complained that the state of organisation was not at its best, because it was just at the beginning of the ye ar.

..nd they expressed doubt as to whether they could do it? - - That is so.

That is the ;ay in which you and Hutchinson then notified different parts of the country. Was there any reason fcr not announcing it publicly? That is quite apart from the fact that it was - we thought it would be legal to do so...

No, I want you to deal with that? We were under the impression that to announce this to the public would be illegal, so that the leaders were likely

16433. (R. RJSHi'O

to be arrested before the time. We wanted to make it public as near to the day as possible, so that even if the leaders were arrested the stay at home should be a success.

So except for going to the Cape and Natal in January, you kept this secret? That is so.

How was this to be announced to the people who were to take part in the stay at home? Firstly the volunteers in the Western Areas knew about it, but they were instructed not to tell the people until they got further instructions. In the Western i.reas, either on the 10th or on the 11th of February, that is the day before the removal, a public meeting was going to be called at which this announcement was going to be made.

So it was going to be kept right to the end? As much as possible.

I want you to consider for a moment another form of action which the Working Committee had discussed in 1954. Do you remember yet another form of action which had been discussed? Yes, I do. The other form of action discussed in 1954 by the Working Committee was to remove the people who were going to be taken to ^eadow-lands by the Resettlement Board into the interior of Sophiatown, but that meant getting accommodation forthem in the interior, houses w.̂ ich were available or building shanties.

Now was there in fact housing available for that? There was no housing available.

So what would that plan have meant? That plan would have entailed the increasing of the slumareas in the area, it would entail getting building material and building on vacant plots shanties.

And getting permissi. n of owners? And

16434. (R. RiiiSHA)

getting the permission of owners. Was that tried at all? That was not

tried at all in 19 54. Was the plan discarded? Yes. Why was the plan discarded in 1954? The

plan was discarded because (a) we had to get building material, secondly we had to get the permission of the landlords, thirdly it wouldincrease the overcrowing, we had to get water, we had to get sanitation. It was so involved a plan that we decided to discard it. COURT ADJOURNS.

COURT R^SUM-jS. BY MR. FISCHER s

My Lords, before I continue with my examina tion, with great regret and great reluctance, My Lord, I wish to ask the Court to make a special entry. I am only doing this My Lord, because I feel that it is my duty to the Accused and it is with particular reluctance that I do it because it arises out of Your Lordship's questions on the volunteers and their duties on the day in question. With respect we submit that that series of questions was an irregularity, and the special entry for which we ask is that the questions put during the examination in chief to the Accused No. 17 by His Lord-ship the Presiding Judge on the duties of a volunteer in the Western Areas, culminating in the question whether the volunteers were expected to assist the police, constituted an irregularity. That is under section 364. BY MR. JU3TICA RUMPFF s

Please have that typed out, and then I

16435. ( R . RJSHA)

propose to consider it. BY MR. FISCEJR S

The authority, My Lord, is thv. case of Rex versus ? Singh (?), repotted in 1956, Volume 4, page 509, and the relevant passage My Lord, is at page 515, where- the Court approved the statement in Rex versus Gill-son about the undesirability that during an examination in chief the Judge should appear to be not so much assisting the Defence as throwing his weight on the side of the prosecution by cross-examining a prisoner4 BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF s

We will announce our daision later. ROBJRT MABILWaN^ R-JSih,% under former oath; EXAMINATION BY MR. FIoCtt.R CONTINUED :

Now in fact, Mr. Reshas you talked about abandoning this plan. Was this j3a5i to remove people revived later on? Th3 plan was revived later on, after the government had brought the date forward. Because at that stage we were now faced with the realities of the situation. There were people who were not at all keen to go to Meadowlands, and they did notwant to be in the houses that were already bou'ht by the government, and they wanted alternative accommodation. BY MR. JUSTIC , i-JQCJR :

Did you know - when did you know that the government had brought the day forward? On the after-noon My Lord of February 8th, a day before.

D-Day was the 12th, and then the government broughtit back to the 9th? That is so.

i'md it came to your knowledge on 8th? Perhaps I should put it this way, My Lord, that as the

\

16436. (R. RESHA)

12th was growing nigh, people were going to be removed began to be restless, they wanted alternative accommoda-tion and then we began to think what we are going to do about these people. But when they heard th.it the date had now been brought forward, they want to the Congress office and demanded that they should be taken somewhere else, they do not want the Resettlement Board to find them there the following day.

I was under the impression that the govern-ment kept this secret? I did.

But nevertheless it came to the knowledge of the people that the date had been brought forward? What happened My Lord is this... BY MR. FISCHER ;

Ishall deal with the story in detail, My Lord, there are a few matters which I have to get before this. Mr. Resha, before I actually come to that day, I want you to look at this leaflet which is called We Shall Not Move, Asihambi, issued by the Transvaal Resist Apartheid Committee. Did the volunteers distribute this?

Thch; is so.

Who decided on the contents of this? The Transvaal Resist apartheid Committee.

Were ynu on that? Did you have a hand in that? Yes.

I am not sure whether this is in or whether only a part has been read in. I think one portion is in, but I would like, My Lord, to put the whole document in. Are these the instructions which were given sometime in January? Yes.

16437. (R. RxJSHA)

And in particular this leaflet ends by calling upon people as follows % "Don't fill in the forms, don't gut in the lorry to go to Meadowlands, be ready to obey Congress call, join the African National Congress, enrol as a volunteer, resist apartheid. We are not goi g to move". BY MR. JUSTICJ KENNEDY ;

Was this distributed amongst the people of the Western Areas? That is so, My Lord. BY MR. FISCHi-JR s

Did the volunteers distribute it? The volunteers distributed that.

I put that in, My Lord, as Exhibit Z. 2 4. There is an exhibit number on it, I see, My Lord, L.M.6. No doubt portion,:: was read in under that exhibit number. Before we get to the actual removal, did the African National Congress and other organisations make a 1st minute attempt bysending a deputation anywhere? - - Yes, the A.N.C., Transvaal Indian Congress, Congress of Demo-crats, Liberal Party if I remember well, there may be one or two organisations I am forgetting, including Father Huddleston, sent a deputation to the Mayor of Johannesburg.

Would you have a look at this qnd see whether that isthe deputation which went? That is a photograph? This is the deputation.

Now how many organisations were on that deputation? The Johannesburg Advisory Board, Transgaal Indian Congress, Congress ofDemocrats, African National Congress, Liberal Party, Western Areas Protest Committee, Sophiatown Ratepayers Association, those are the organisa-tions .

16438. (R. RJSHA)

And wore statements issued at this time? I am talking about shortly before the removal actually took place? Yes, there were statements issued.

•Do you remember any of them?—There was - there were statements issued by various organisations, I don't know if I understood you well.

I dm't know if you remember any of those. Can you remember who issued statements and the tenor of the statements? If you can't remember it doesn't matter?

No, I can't remember any particulars.

Well now, may we turn now to the 8th of February. When did it come to your notice that there was to be a removal on the 9th? It was at about four o'clock in the afternoon of February, 8th, 1955, when members of the Special Branch served a notice on me, banning meetings in the Western Areas, in Johannesburg I should say, including Roodepoort. And I also read in the press the same afternoon that the day of the removal had been brought forward to Wednesday, February the 9th.

What did you do ? I immediately tried to call a meeting of the National Working Committee of the African National Congress.

Were you able to get the full Committee? I was not able to get the full Committee, but I succeeded in getting a few members, like Mr. Tambo, Mr. Hutchinson,

Mr. Vundhla, I remember th)se three.

It was on that same afternoon that Mr. Tambo issued a statement which - parts of which has been read into the record already? Yes.

Those are parts of O.R.T. 66. The paragraph which has been read in is this, and it is followed by a

16439. (R. R-iSHA)

second paragraph, "This struggle like all others will "be conducted in a disciplined and peaceful manner and the people are called upon to remain calm in the face of all provocation, iiny disturbances or violence which may occur will have been initiated by the government and its agents." And he concluded % "Our faith in the justice of our cause, the growing unity and soli '.arity of theoppressed people and the popularity of our cause, and the small numbers of those who support reaction, guarantees the invincibility of our position and the certainty of our final victory." BY I JR. JUS TIC, j EJ-TN.3DY ;

Incidentally, Mr. Fischer, I.N. 6 was read in as A.157 at page 791* BY MR. JUSTIC-j EEKKER ;

That statement, O.R.T. 66, that was issued I think to S.A.I.A.? That is so, My Lord.

Do you know that of your own knowledge? I know that of my own knowledge, and to other newspapers like the Star and the Rand Daily Mail. BY MR. JUSTIC-j Ie,;J!̂ DY j

Was it published, do you know? I think I read it in one of the daily newspapers, My Lord, I am not sure now. BY MR. FISCH.JR :

You then got some sort of a meeting together and will you tell the Court what you discussed and what you decided? We discussed the possibility of implemen-ting the stay at home the following day. You realise that by then we had decided to implement the stay at home on the 12th, but when the date was brought forward, we Jiad to consider now whether it was possible to implement the

16440. (R. Rj,SHA)

plan on the 9th. We then decided it was not possible to do sc. so we abandoned the plan. We then considered also the request that was being made by the people who did not want to remain in the houses in which they were going to be moved from the following day,...

By that time had you heard anything about what the police were doing? We also rjceived informa-tion to the effect that the police were parading troop carriers with police carrying all types of weapons, going up and down the streets of Sophiatown, There were police also on various street corners.

So what did you decide? We decided then to make plans to move the people from the houses that were going to be - where they were going to be moved the following day.

And then what occurred? After that, afte the meeting, I then went to Sophiatown. I found Sophia-town a changed place, as I say almost on every corner there were fully armed police and I went straight to the place where volunteers were meeting every evening.

Had volunteers been meeting regularly during the last period? As from the 31st of January, 1955, volunteers were me ting regularly at corner Meyer and Victoria Road.

Was this that open square? Yes. And so you wentthere? I went there, and

I found between 3,000 and 5,000 people, together with abour a score of uniformed police. When I got there I was told that the police were trying to disperse the people, they had issued them with some of these notices

Collection: 1956 Treason Trial Collection number: AD1812

PUBLISHER: Publisher:- Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand Location:- Johannesburg ©2011

LEGAL NOTICES:

Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.

People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.