Zulu Poll Tax Prisoners 1907-1910

The Bambatha Rebellion was the last armed resistance against white rule before the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910. In the years following the Anglo-Boer War white employers in Natal had difficulty recruiting black farm workers because of increased competition from the gold mines of the Witwatersrand. The colonial authorities introduced a poll tax in addition to the existing hut tax to encourage black men to enter the labour market.  Bambatha was one of the chiefs who resisted the introduction and collection of the new tax.  The government of Natal sent police officers to collect the tax from recalcitrant districts, and in February 1906 two white officers were killed near Richmond, KwaZulu-Natal resulting in the introduction of martial law. Bambatha fled north to consult King Dinizulu, whose exile on St Helena between 1890 and 1897 has been described in an earlier post but on returning to the Mpanza Valley discovered that the Natal government had deposed him as chief.  He gathered together a small force of supporters and began launching a series of guerrilla attacks.  In late April 1906 Colonial troops under the command of Colonel Duncan McKenzie were sent out on an expedition to confront Bambatha and once they succeeded in getting face to face with and surrounding the rebels at Mome Gorge, the British victory in the unequal battle was inevitable, given the vast disparity of forces.  Colonial soldiers opened fire with machine guns and cannon on rebels mostly armed only with traditional assegais, knobkerries and cowhide shields and Bambatha was killed and beheaded during the battle.

King Dinizulu was arrested, tried, convicted of treason and sentenced to four years imprisonment, though only served two.  An estimate of the total number of rebels that took part in the Rebellion is very difficult to arrive at but judging from the reports of Commanding Officers, the aggregate for Natal and Zululand would be about 10,000 to 12,000, of whom about 2,300 were killed.  Colonial casualties numbered only 30 killed or died and the cost of the campaign was estimated at £883,000. Bambatha’s men were destroyed by the militia with a thoroughness which disconcerted many even at the time. Winston Churchill, then an Under-Secretary in the Colonial Office in London, was scathing about the colonial reaction, and, on being consulted on the subject of a campaign medal to be awarded to the troops, suggested that it should be struck in bronze, at the colony’s expense, and depict not the head of King Edward VII but the severed head of a rebel leader.  The issue of a medal was approved by The King and was granted to those, including nursing sisters, who served between the 11th February and the 3rd August, for a continuous period of not less than twenty days, also to certain civilians, Native Chiefs, and others who had rendered valuable service. The Saint Helena Herald of 18th September 2009 has a photograph of the medal awarded to A.E. Thorpe for service during the Bambatha rebellion.

The militia’s actions still make disturbing reading now, they burned homes, looted, and shot Africans, under arms or not, with impunity.  The aftermath was equally ruthless.  The rank and file of some 4,700 prisoners were tried by their respective Magistrates and by Judges. The great majority of sentences ran from six months to two years, with whipping added.  After a number had been flogged, the Government directed suspension of all further whippings.  Special arrangements had to be made in Durban and elsewhere for accommodating the prisoners.  About 2,500 were confined in a compound at Jacobs near Durban, formerly used by Chinese labourers; 400 (for the most part with sentences of two years) in a special prison at the Point, Durban; 100 at Fort Napier, Pietermaritzburg; and the rest in various gaols.

By mid-August 1906 twenty-five Chiefs who had supported the rebels had been arrested, charged and tried by Courts Martial for a variety of offences; sedition, public violence, murder, rebellion and high treason. Sentences ranged from death, 10 years plus 500 cattle, 10 years plus 20 lashes and 20 years all of which were later reduced, though all were to be served with hard labour and the prisoners were kept in local custody.

In early January 1907 correspondence “Relating to the removal of certain native prisoners from Natal” commences with the Governor, Sir Henry McCallum, writing to The Secretary of State for The Colonies in London, Lord Elgin:
As your Excellency is aware, persistent reports are now circulating in Zululand and Natal amongst the natives there by those who have been released that all rebels are about to be released in consequence of an order received from across the sea to effect that the Home Government has told this Government that the rebels were only soldiers acting under orders of their chiefs, and they should not, therefore, have been punished.  No more dangerous course therefore could be pursued by Ministers than the adoption of any act which could give the least ground for cultivating so pernicious a belief in the native mind, whether that mind be loyal or wicked.  These reports, together with a recent one from Swaziland, induce Ministers to urge the necessity of a course of action which will demonstrate once for all to the native mind that rebellion is not a light matter or one to be followed by trivial consequences.  Ministers think it essential that under the circumstances such demonstration can only be given by the immediate deportation of the ringleaders, to the number of about twenty-five, who, as long as they are in local custody, have, and will have, opportunities which no guarding can repress of conveying to their sympathisers outside reports and messages calculated to incite to further disorder, if not to attempts to obtain release.

The Colonial Prisoners Removal Act cap. 31 of 1884 appears to Ministers to provide the machinery to meet just such an emergency as confronts this Colony at this time.  Ministers think that question of expediency in this instance can hardly be questioned and suggest that Island of Mauritius is, in respect of climate and other conditions, a locality to which exception could not well be taken.  In view of urgency of matter, Ministers would be glad if your Excellency would cable this application to the Secretary of State whilst simultaneously inquiring of the Mauritius Government by cable if it will be as good as to assist us.  As a matter of great emergency I beg for your Lordship's good offices and that with least possible delay. I am repeating this telegram to Governor, Mauritius, that he may have full information on the subject.

By January 30, it was agreed and:” Ministers beg me to inform you that satisfactory despatch has been received from Governor, Mauritius, as to taking rebel ringleaders as prisoners. They now only await approval of His Majesty's Government”.

On February 25th The Governor of Mauritius sent a telegram to London: Cases of beri-beri reported to me yesterday, five in Central Prison, two fatal; seventeen in Port Louis Prison.  Preventive measures against spread of disease by segregation and alteration in diet are being taken and inquiry being made to ascertain cause.

The Secretary of State requested: Please furnish me with your opinion as to whether the outbreak of beri-beri at the Central Gaol, reported by you in your telegram of 25th February, can be confined within limits which will secure the immunity of the Zulu chiefs who are to be entrusted to your care.  

McCallum was becoming increasingly concerned at the delay: Much regret in hearing of outbreak especially as rumours of unrest are becoming daily aggravated. Immediate deportation of ringleaders would probably put end to this. Rank and file of rebels are being employed on Public works in wood and iron temporary buildings secured by double-fenced entanglement enclosures, such as used for safe custody of Boer prisoners.  These have proved healthy and satisfactory and Ministers would like the same provided forthwith at Mauritius at cost of Government of Natal till the gaols are immune from beri-beri." Whilst discouraging credence of rumours and reports received I cannot help feeling uneasy, and shall be glad if Ministers' proposal could be approved by you and deportation of ring- leaders take place with least possible delay.

Further correspondence left the matter unresolved: Re. Your Lordship's telegram with regard to beri-beri.  After consultation with Chief Medical Officer I cannot guarantee immunity from the disease for any person in confinement in any of our prisons and I am advised that no such prison can safely be used for the purpose.  This ruled out Mauritius but McCallum had already been in correspondence with Governor Gallwey on St Helena who discussed the matter with Lord Elgin:

The Governor of St, Helena to the Secretary of State,
The Castle, St. Helena, March 21, 1907.

I have the honour to inform Your Lordship that I received a telegraphic despatch from the Governor of Natal on the 16th instant asking me whether St. Helena would receive twenty-five rebel ringleaders sentenced to various terms of penal servitude, using a portion of empty barracks as a prison ; and, if so, on what terms. Sir Henry McCallum informed me that owing to an outbreak of beri-beri in the Mauritius prisons the arrangement made to send the prisoners to that Colony had fallen through.  He further informed me that the Mauritius Government had agreed to take the twenty- five prisoners at a cost of £20 per man per annum, provided the Natal Government sent two European warders with the
men.
I discussed the matter in Council on the 18th instant, when it was unanimously decided to receive the prisoners provided the War Office consented to the use of Ladder Hill Barracks as a prison. I accordingly telegraphed to this effect to the Governor of Natal, adding that the cost per man would not exceed £20 a year, but that the Natal Government must pay actual cost. I made this latter stipulation as this Government has no wish to make money out of the Natal Government whilst being unable to risk the smallest loss under the transaction. The actual feeding of the prisoners, including fuel, will not exceed £10 a year per man consequently the traders and farmers will benefit only to a very small extent. Every little helps, however, in these hard times.

Telegrams between McCallum, Gallwey and Lord Elgin give further comment and information:

The Castle, St. Helena, March 22, 1907. On the 17th instant, in reply to a telegram I despatched
to Your Excellency the previous day, you informed me that the following was the prisoners' diet:
Breakfast. — 12 ounces mealie meal.
Supper. — 12 ounces mealie meal.
Dinner. — 16 ounces mealie meal, or 2 lbs. potatoes.
Eight ounces fresh meat and four ounces fresh vegetables twice a week.  One ounce of salt daily.

Your Excellency further stated that if mealies were not obtainable in this Colony that you would send supplies thereof periodically. I may say at once that mealies are obtainable here. I take it that the prisoners themselves make the meal. As regards the cost of feeding the prisoners, I calculate that according to the diet laid down by Your Excellency this will not exceed £10 per man per annum, including fuel.  The cost of feeding a prisoner in the gaol here is roughly, including fuel, 1 shilling. a day. The diet, allowed, however, is quite different to the scale laid down for your prisoners. I take it that the two European warders will find themselves in everything but quarters, and the usual barrack furniture. I am not aware as to what furniture, if any, is required for the prisoners.  There is a large swimming bath close by to where they will be confined with a continual flow of water passing through. I presume the prisoners do their own cooking.  Should cooking and eating utensils and bedding be purchased?  I must apologise for troubling Your Excellency with questions of these minor details, but I have no knowledge of the Zulu nor the way he is treated when a prisoner.  Your Excellency will see that £20 per man a year should more than cover the recurrent expenditure necessary to keep the prisoners.  We have the following items with their approximate cost per annum:

Food and fuel                           £250
Medical attendance                   £50
Medicines                                 £6
Three warders at £55                  £165
Oil, wick, and matches               £5
Soap and cleaning materials      £6
Water rate                                 £4
Contingencies                           £5
Total                                         £490

I have allowed for three extra warders as there will have to be a man continually on duty day and night, owing to the nature of the buildings in which the prisoners will be confined. This Government can lend rifles for the warders' use if necessary. I take it that the prisoners do not receive anything in the way of tea, coffee, or other groceries with the exception of salt? I ask this question as the Zulus who were interned in this Colony ten years ago received coffee, sugar, and other groceries. In fact, they appear to have been given anything they asked for.

April 3. from McCallum. The situation (in Natal) is improving.  The atmosphere will be much cleared by transportation of ringleaders. Ministers inquire when they may expect your authority for their removal. 

April 16. from McCallum. Ministers would respectfully urge upon the Secretary of State necessity for giving immediate authority for the removal to Saint Helena of the native ringleaders concerned in recent rebellion. It is now over three months since the proposal for the deportation of these natives from the Colony was originally made, and the great delay which has taken place through unforeseen circumstances has been unfortunate and embarrassing. Ministers deprecate any further delay, and will be obliged if your Excellency will at once cable to the Secretary of State urging him to accelerate settlement.

There then followed the question of the warrants needed for due process:
April 20. Warrants required under the Colonial Prisoners Removal Act, Section 6, must be signed by Secretary of State for the Colonies and by Governor of St. Helena as well as by Governor of Natal before prisoners can leave Natal. Warrants will be forwarded to Governor of St. Helena duly signed by me by the next mail, which leaves on 3rd May, and he has been instructed by telegraph to sign them and forward them to you by the same steamer. We regret the delay but it is inevitable. I would further confirm my telegram to you, wherein I state that I have been informed by the Secretary of State that it will not be possible to move the prisoners from Natal until about the end of May. Lord Elgin informs me that he has sent you for signature the warrants required under Section 6 of the Colonial Prisoners' Removal Act, with a request that you will sign and forward them to me by the same steamer. In this connection I should feel obliged if, when despatching the warrants, you will give directions that they be forwarded from Cape Town overland, as this will avoid a delay of three or four days.

Ministers propose to send the prisoners under special arrangement by direct steamer from Durban, and as soon as the details are settled I will apprise you by telegram of the date of their departure, and the probable date of their arrival at St. Helena.

The delay caused by the warrants having to be signed in London, St Helena and Pietermaritzburg meant that it was the 1st June when the twenty-five prisoners left Natal on the steamship Inyati to proceed directly to St Helena. . Despite their best efforts the Colonial Office through Lord Elgin failed to persuade the Natal colonial government to treat them as political prisoners and not as ordinary criminals and on arrival at St Helena they were treated as such.

Barbara George’s article www.saint.fm/Independent/20090605.pdf quotes the St Helena Guardian of 13th June 1907 reporting their arrival.
The expected steamship Inyati, Captain White, from Natal, with 25 Zulu prisoners in charge of Cunningham and Shepherd, arrived in port on Tuesday evening at 7p.m. The prisoners on landing yesterday at 7.30 a.m. were dressed in khaki jackets and pants. Several of them had the letter L with other marks on their jackets, presumably to indicate their sentences, which range from “Life” to 10 years imprisonment with hard labour. Their ages would appear to be from 20 years to 70. They seemed in a half starved condition and could hardly walk when landed. They were marched off to Ladder Hill Barracks where the Royal Artillery Garrison were stationed, under the escort of the local police armed with rifles. Ladder Hill is to be their future abode and they will be looked after by the Troopers who arrived with them and three of our local labourers as guard. We understand their diet is to be 12 ounces of mealy meal for breakfast and 12 for supper and 18 ounces of the same food for dinner with salt, and during the week some vegetables and 1 lb. of fresh beef per man per week will be issued. To tea, coffee, milk and tobacco they will be strangers. Blankets to lie on only will be furnished to them. Whether these prisoners are to be placed to work on our roads we shall have to learn. Considering the scarcity of work for our own labourers, we hope not.  Whether making this island “known to the world” as the “Island of Historic Misfortune”, the prison for men such as the Zulus is a wise step or not, we await with interest to ascertain.

By July 1907 questions were being asked in The House of Commons. hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1907/jul/18/treatment... This exchange between Ramsey Macdonald and Winston Churchill being one such.
Mr. RJ Ramsay Macdonald: I beg further to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that on arrival at St. Helena the Zulu prisoners were in an emaciated condition and looked half-starved, and some of them were hardly able to walk; whether amongst these is the chief Tilonko, from whom a petition is lying upon the Table of this House setting forth that he was illegally condemned under an indemnity Act wider in scope than has ever been assented to by the Sovereign, and which is alleged to have been unjustly put into operation; and whether he proposes to take any action on the matter.
The Under-Secretary of State for The Colonies (Mr. Churchill, Manchester N.W.)  It was necessary to deport these prisoners under the Colonial Prisoners Removal Act, and they therefore remain in the status of convicts, but it has always been the view of the Secretary of State that the fact of their deportation would justify their receiving, while in St. Helena, liberal treatment in regard to conditions of their imprisonment, especially in the matter of dietary. He will at once call for a Report from the Governor of St. Helena on this subject, and will authorise him to make such modifications in the scale of dietary and general conditions as are possible consistently with this provisions of the law.

These Zulu prisoners were certainly not greeted with the same enthusiasm afforded by the islanders to the Boer prisoners seven years earlier, nor was their time on the island to be as fondly remembered locally as was the imprisonment of Dinizulu in 1890. There is a dearth of material written about this period and their time on the island is barely recorded.

Towards the end of 1910 the eighteen survivors amongst the twenty-five prisoners who had been sent to St Helena were granted parole. They were part of the general amnesty that was granted to about 4,500 prisoners by the Governor General during the formation of the Union of South Africa.  Seven had died on the island as the Death Register records but their graves cannot be found and are not in the burial register.  Two of the eighteen prisoners were carried on stretchers because they were seriously ill.  John Dube, the founder of the Zulu-English newspaper Ilanga lase Natal remarked that the prisoners looked very wasted although they had only served three years of their prison sentences. Most of them looked very old and could not even be recognized. In fact they no longer looked like chiefs at all, but looked like commoners.

These were the last of St Helena’s political prisoners until the arrival of the three Bahrainis in 1957 described in an earlier post..

The following sources were used to compile these notes:
http://www.archive.org/stream/indexingandprci00beakgoog/indexingandprci00beakgoog_djvu.txt
http://www.napoleon.org/EN/reading_room/articles/files/helena_prison_obey.asp
www.archive.org/details/historyofzulureb00stua
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bambatha_Rebellion
scnc.ukzn.ac.za/doc/B/Ds/Biography_DIs/Dinizulu/Hadebe,_M...

The Bahraini Three, 1957-1961

The National Union Committee (NUC) was a nationalist reformist political organization formed in Bahrain in 1954 in response to sectarian clashes between Sunni and Shia members of the population.  The original aims were to push for an elected popular assembly, a codified system of civil and criminal law, the establishment of an appellate court, the right to form trade unions, an end to British Colonial influence through the removal of the Ruler’s British Adviser Charles Belgrave, and an end to sectarianism.

The original committee was made up of four Sunni representatives and four Shia representatives amongst whom were Abdulrahman al Bakir, its Secretary, Abdali al Alaiwat and Abdulaziz al Shamlan.

The NUC successfully orchestrated a number of general strikes and demonstrations in the country to push for its demands.  In March 1956, British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd was visiting Bahrain.  Crowds of protesters lined the streets to shout anti-British slogans and threw sand and stones at the Foreign Secretary's entourage.  Abdulrahman al Bakir was among the leaders of the demonstrations.  He was asked to leave the country after the incident for an extended stay abroad, and departed to Egypt only to return to Bahrain in September 1956.

In July 1956 Egypt had nationalised the Suez Canal and in October the NUC called for strikes and demonstrations against the Israeli-Anglo-French attack on Egypt in the Suez Campaign.  This led to days of violence in Bahrain.  In November, the ruler Sheikh Salman ibn Hamad Al Khalifa (1895-1961), ordered the arrest of the NUC leaders, accusing Al Bakir, Al Shamlan and Aliwat of attempting to take his life.  On December 23rd a specially set up court made up of three judges, all members of the ruling Al Khalifa family, tried the men, with two others, and found all guilty.  The three acknowledged leaders were sentenced to fourteen years to be served at a prison located outside of Bahrain the other two to ten years in a Bahraini prison. Al Shamlan was the son of Sa'ad Al Shamlan who had been deported by the British to India in 1938 along with several others who had called for reform.

Using The Colonial Prisoners Removal Act, 1869, the British made the necessary arrangements for the three convicted ringleaders to be transported on a naval frigate to St Helena where they were held at Munden’s Point.  Once there they attracted considerable publicity and on 27th January 1957 Al Bakir appealed to the Supreme Court on St Helena and to the Judicial Committee of the British Privy Council for a writ of habeas corpus.  In June 1960 the Privy Council dismissed the appeal

Munden's Point, April 2010

Members of Parliament continued to question the Government, and the British press continued to report on the matter.   Hansard 7th March 1957 reported:

At the moment, three citizens of Bahrain are sitting in a gaol in St. Helena, in a building 200 feet above the sea with a sheer drop down precipitous rocks.  They are serving a sentence of fourteen years' imprisonment which, if they are very good, may be commuted to eleven and a half years. There, like Napoleon before them, they will eat out their hearts and eat away their lives in lonely exile, until the time when their sentences expire.  They were taken there in the Royal Naval frigate "Loch Insh", which lifted them up from Bahrain on 28th December last and deposited them at St. Helena on 27th January; so they are now one month and 6.000 miles away from their homeland, their families and their friends.  Why are they there, serving a term of imprisonment in St. Helena?  I am sure that the Minister will not be able to say that they have been convicted of any offence against British citizens or British authorities.  They have not committed any crimes against the British Government or against the colonial Administration.  They have, in fact, been convicted and sentenced by the Ruler of Bahrain. The State of Bahrain is independent and under British protection, but is not a British Colony. How, then, does it come about that these Bahraini citizens are serving a term of fourteen years' imprisonment in a British Colony?  We are told by the Foreign Office that the Ruler of Bahrain requested that they should be sent to St. Helena. In other words, it appears that the British Empire is now offering its services as a kind of general prison warder to rulers who are troubled by inconvenient citizens. I hope that this case does not create a precedent. This extraordinary procedure is very probably illegal. It is certainly immoral and undoubtedly inexpedient.

The Bahraini three remained a source of embarrassment and London now wanted an alternative to keeping them in a British prison.  The Governor of St. Helena, Sir Robert Alford, visited Whitehall and warned that the three exiled Bahrainis would object to their return to Bahrain and if that was their only alternative they would much prefer to remain on St. Helena.  According to the Governor, prison conditions were good; the prisoners had access to all of the books and periodicals in the local library, and had a powerful short-wave radio, which received Middle Eastern stations.  In addition, accompanied by a guard, once a week they were permitted a jeep ride around the island.

Parliamentary unease continued as Hansard of 7th July 1960 reported:  Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor, through a notice published in an extraordinary issue of the St. Helena Gazette, declared these men to be convicted before they were even tried, that the trial which took place has been declared by every competent observer to have been a sheer farce, that the men were shanghaied to St. Helena by a disgraceful piece of jiggery-pokery by the Right Hon. Gentleman's predecessor, the Foreign Secretary and the Ruler of Bahrain, all conspiring together?  Is it not time that these men were released and compensation paid for the wrong done to them?

Hansard of 20th December 1960 detailed the jiggery-pokery:

This matter concerns three prisoners who are at present within the custody of the Governor of St. Helena, that is, they are within the custody of Her Majesty’s Government. they were apparently members of a revolutionary group in Bahrain. The object of that revolutionary group appears to have been to secure that some members of some advisory committee on public sanitation should be elected instead of being nominated by the Ruler.  It seems a rather limited revolutionary aim.

Also involved here is the fact that some people—nobody suggests that they were any of these prisoners; they were people who might have been their friends—threw some stones at a car containing no less a person than the present Chancellor of the Exchequer.  I would ask the House to pay rather special attention to the dates of the events connected with this matter. As a result of these sad and lamentable activities, on 18th December, 1956, the Ruler of Bahrain sent a communication to Her majesty the Queen which contained this passage:  We beseech you to allow us to make arrangements with the Governor of St. Helena for the reception of the persons who will"— and hon. Members should note the word "will"— be sent to that island in accordance with the sentence decided.  That was on 18th December.  Four days later, on 22nd December, a court was convened to try these gentlemen, and their trial took place five days after the sending of the communication, on 23rd December.  This was a trial of people who on 18th December had not even been charged but concerning whom it had already been decided that they would be sent to St. Helena. Their sentence had been decided.  That seems to be a strictly "Alice in Wonderland" order of proceedings. 

On June 13th 1961 at a further habeas corpus action the acting Chief Justice of St Helena ruled that the three prisoners had been unlawfully detained and ordered them to be discharged and awarded costs.  On June 19th the Lord Privy Seal (Edward Heath) said in the House that the judgement had been based not on the grounds that there was any defect in the men’s original trial but that the warrant under which they were transferred from the custody of the Ruler in 1956 was invalid.  They arrived in London on July 14th where they were entertained in the House of Commons and held a press conference in which they praised the British people but condemmed the British government for its "tyrannical" policies in the Arab world. In October the government’s solicitors were instructed to negotiate compensation with the solicitors representing the three men which was subsequently paid.

For details of The Three following their release I received the following information researched and translated from Arabic by Yousef Khalifa Al Ghulfi in Sharjah.  Taken from the archive of the Bahraini Al-Wasat newspaper and from an article by Dr, Hussein Al-Baharna, "Readings in the Trials of the National Union Committee Leaders". His blog post on the same subject can be found at: http://yksbs.blogspot.com/2011/03/three-men-of-st-helena

In his autobiography 'From Bahrain to Exile', Al-Bakir noted, "No one can picture our happiness. It was as if we were reborn again. After numerous attempts from 1958 to 1961 to ask for our release, Allah finally delivered us our rights and undid that which was unjust.  Infuriated at their release the Emir of Bahrain refused to grant the three men new Bahraini passports and the British government granted them British passports with the status of "protected person" allowing them to travel to whatever destination they wished, and they immediately left for the Middle East.  Al-Shamlan and Al-Alaiwat travelled to Damascus while Al-Bakir settled in Beirut.  Al-Bakir took up trade once again and continued to travel between Lebanon and Qatar until his death and burial in Beirut in 1967. Al-Alaiwat left Damascus in 1966 for Iraq where he lived in the famed Kadhimyah neighbourhood of Baghdad until his death on January 1969, after which he was buried in the holy Shia city of Najaf.  Al-Shamlan managed to return to Bahrain in 1971 where he helped draft the 1973 constitution (it was eventually overturned a year later prompting demands for its return that continue to this day).  Later, Al-Shamlan served as Bahrain's Ambassador to Egypt, Malta, Tunisia, and the Arab League and continued to live in Muharraq in Bahrain until his death in December 1988.

Photo and information of The Bahraini Three from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Union_Committee and from http://bahrain.wikia.com/wiki/The_Bahraini_three_on_St._Helena%2C_1956-1961

Hansard reports can be accessed at http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/bahrain%20st%20helena



Robert Jenkins, 1741

Robert Jenkins hands a swooning Prime Minister Robert Walpole his Spanish-sliced ear which led to the War of Jenkins’s Ear in 1739. His companions lift off his wig to show the scar while one of Walpole's associates displays total indifference, preferring to converse with a lady. Satirical Cartoon, 1738, British Museum.

Returning home from the West Indies in command of the brig Rebecca in April 1731, Captain Jenkins' ship was stopped and boarded by the Spanish guarda-costa La Isabela.  Though no proof of smuggling had been found her commander, Captain Julio León Fandiño, had Jenkins bound to a mast, then sliced off one of his ears with his sword and told him to say to his King "same will happen to him (the king) if caught doing the same".

There are various conflicting contemporary stories about this episode.  Jenkins was allowed to appear before the king with his story shortly after his return to England in June the same year but the matter was dropped and only revived again during the agitation of 1738 when political capital was eventually made out of the incident.  Brooke in his 1806 History of St. Helena relates that:  Captain Jenkins was insulted, tortured, and had one of his ears torn off, which, upon his arrival in England, he exhibited at the bar of the House of Commons, and, being asked by a member what he thought and did when they mangled him, made that memorable reply, "I committed my soul to God, and my cause to my country."

The evidence from parliamentary records is inconclusive.  It is recorded in the House of Commons Journal that on 16 March 1738 it was 'Ordered, that Captain Robert Jenkins do attend this House immediately'.  He obviously did not do so because again on 17 March it was 'Ordered, That Captain Robert Jenkins do attend, on Tuesday morning next, the Committee of the whole House to whom the Petition of divers merchants ... interested in the British plantations in America ... and many others is referred'.  After that there is no mention of him at all, even though reference is made to the petitions 'of divers merchants ...' etc. several times on 21-22, 28 and 30 March.  The MP William Pulteney, however, refers to the Jenkins case in a speech after the Committee had reported to the House and other contemporary accounts state that Jenkins did in fact appear before the Committee.

Unfortunately detailed records of the proceedings of the Committee of the whole House do not exist for this period.  According to the Dictionary of National Biography Jenkins produced something which he asserted was the ear which was cut or torn off, which suggests that it need not have been the actual ear.  Indeed, it seems highly improbable that he would have kept it for seven years.  After all, he was not to know in 1731 that his story was going to be brought back into the limelight and become an important factor in bringing about war with Spain so many years later.  During the popular excitement following the Committee's report it was said that Jenkins paraded around showing off his 'ear' wrapped in cotton wool and kept in either a box or a bottle.  Producing the alleged ear in the House of Commons (described as a retrospective put-up job) helped to force Walpole into what became known as the ‘War of Jenkins’ Ear’ against Spain in 1739, which then merged into the War of the Austrian Succession between 1740 and 1748.

On St. Helena the second administration of Governor Pyke, starting in March 1731, was notable for his arbitrary conduct.  White inhabitants were ignominiously whipped and imprisoned for trivial offences and military officers fined and suspended without courts martial.  He was eventually judged unfit to be any longer trusted with the power he so grossly abused, the Court of Directors dismissed him, but prior to the receipt of their orders to this effect, in July 1738, he died.  The Court then confirmed the senior member of Council, Mr John Goodwin, as Governor.  The next ranking individual was Mr. Duke Crisp who Brooke describes as; “a man not deficient in talents, and possessed of no common share of knavery and cunning.  He was concerned in trade with Governor Goodwin, had an entire influence over him, and was, in fact, the grand spring which regulated all the measures of Council. The Company's lands were disposed of for a tenth part of their value, the stores embezzled, the most infamous frauds committed by erasure and false entries, and the treasury robbed of nearly four thousand pounds”.

In 1739 Goodwin died and Crisp succeeded him as acting Governor but he had neglected to give a due share of the plunder to G. Powel, one of his colleagues in Council, a man still more artful than himself, and equally devoid of principle.  Powel turned informer, and from the nature of the intelligence he secretly transmitted to London, it was judged proper that a person of integrity should be immediately sent out, with extraordinary powers, to investigate the charges, and even, if necessary, to supersede the Governor and Council.  The man selected for this was Robert Jenkins who was appointed Supervisor of all the Company's affairs at St. Helena.  Under this title he left for the island, where he arrived in May, 1740, and, pursuant to his instructions, landed in the first boat, and immediately proceeded to the Castle, accompanied by Mr. John Godfrey, his assistant.  Announcing that he had charge of dispatches, a Council was instantly assembled.  He then opened his commission, summoned the chief Supercargoes, and Captains of the Company's ships then at the island, and in their presence demanded the keys of the treasury.  The cash found, and counted on the spot, amounted to only six pounds sterling.  Mr. Crisp and the rest of the Council (with the exception of Mr. Powel), were declared to be no longer in the Company's service, and Jenkins assumed the government and formed a Council.  A thorough investigation was started and most ample proof found in support of the accusations made by Mr. Powel, who was in consequence made second in Council; and the estates of the guilty were seized to the extent of the Company's losses, which were calculated at six thousand two hundred and eighty-four pounds.

May 9th 1741.—Governor Robert Jenkins arrived with Powell as deputy Governor—and Mr. Godfrey 3rd in Council.  Agreeable to our Hon. Master's orders we immediately demanded of Messrs. Duke Crispe and Bazett the keys of the Castle.  We found Cash in notes £94 7 6 and the Cash Book brought up to 31st March by which there appears to be due to the Company only £6 19 0.

Mr. Crispe and Bazett being told they were not to go hence until they have satisfied our just demands they answer the late Mr. Goodwin was cashere they therefore consider him to be wholly culpable with respect to the deficiency.  Resolved, as they have refused to give the security asked that there be a guard upon their persons until the Dane ship now riding in the road was sailed.

Letter from Gov. Jenkins to Directors, 11th May 1741.—Your Honours Estate here is in a worse condition than we expected.  The frauds are so errant and so open that Mr. Crispe and Mr. Bazett have confessed them only they scruple being made accountable.  Mr. Goodwin we find (unhappily for him) was concerned with Mr. Crispe.  We would if we could point out who has been the chief actor therein but all that we are able to say is that it is evident that Mr. Crispe has been the wheel by which the other two have blindly moved—the total deficiency is £6284.  The Estates of the late Mr. Goodwin and Mr. Bazett are more than sufficient to make good their proportions.  Mr. Crispe gave an Inventory 1st of £1,427, afterwards one of £2,461—now we assure your Honours we know not what to say of this gentleman.

Council Proceedings 10th June.—Mr. Crispe owns to having burnt papers and letters which were taken by him from a file of Mr. Goodwin's a few hours after he died. Council agreed that Mr. Crispe appears to us in such colours as is not possible for us to paint.

June 4^th 1742.—Mr. Crispe finds Bonds for £1145 and is allowed to leave by next ship.

Jenkins, having executed his commission, was succeeded by Major Lambert who arrived on the 22d of March, 1741, in the ship Harrington, of which Captain Jenkins was directed to assume the command for the remainder of the voyage.  Lambert didn’t last long as Governor, dying on July 20^th the same year and nothing further is on the record relating to Robert Jenkins, though he is remembered in the name of one of the houses at Prince Andrew School.  During his time on the island Jenkins lived in a cottage on the Sandy Bay road, on the right after the Baptist Chapel almost as far as it was possible to be from Jamestown.  Ian Baker gives the detail that “you might just make out a black stone built into the corner of one cottage:

Rob. Jenkins Esq.,

December 16^th AD

1741

http://www.bweaver.nom.sh/janisch/janisch_1725-49.html

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/parliamentary-archives/archives-practical/archives-faqs/records-frequently-asked-questions/#jump-link-30

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Jenkins_(master_mariner)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CmYLAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=brooke+history+of+st+helena&hl=en&ei=h3OYTfDxGI6K4gbq5OjUAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Last Boer Prisoner, 1949

When my wife and I first visited in 2006 I bought a copy of “St. Helena: The Forgotten Island”.  This is a reprint, produced on behalf of The Museum of St. Helena, of an article by Quentin Keynes published in the National Geographic Magazine in August 1950 and includes some photographs not selected for the original article.  In the booklet are biographical notes, by his nephew Simon, describing the development of Quentin’s attachment to the island.  Helped by the purchase, in March 1951, of Philip Gosse’s collection of books on St. Helena he eventually owned what he believed must be one of the largest collections in the world of rare and early books and pamphlets on this interesting place.  Simon opines that he no doubt felt a connection with St. Helena through his maternal great-grandfather, Charles Darwin, who had visited on the homeward voyage of the Beagle in 1836.  He describes Quentin’s first visit in January 1949 as “the fulfilment of a boyhood dream and the start of a man’s career” and I am grateful to Simon for allowing me to use, from the article, the picture and text below.

Beside a Muzzle-loader Stands the Last Boer Prisoner.

Although he was soon liberated, 75-year old Charles Smith liked St. Helena so much he has left it but once since he was brought here by the British from South Africa.

On his second day ashore Quentin climbed the 699 steps of Jacob’s Ladder, taking “a panting 15 minutes,” an exertion he thought worthwhile because:

”up on the fort stood a very interesting old man: Charles Smith, 75, St. Helena’s last surviving Boer War prisoner  He was captured by the British in South Africa and had been shipped along with the Boer general, Piet Cronje and 512 other captives to this island which had already been the rocky cell for another distinguished man of action.  He told us he had been liberated in 1903, but that, liking his insular prison, he had elected to stay there forever.  He had married a native and for many years had run a bakery.  Only once had he ventured into the outside world, and that was in 1912 when he travelled to Durban to see his ailing mother.”

Is it possible that someone with access to the St. Helena BMD Records could tell me when he died?

Note: Cronje and 514 (Jackson) prisoners arrived at Jamestown on HMS Niobe the 11th April 1900.

St. Helena: The Forgotten Island ISBN 0 906919 21 5, Baldwin’s London, 2005

War's End, 1902

The following notes and the photograph are taken from the 1905 American Edition of Emily Jackson’s St. Helena “The Historic Island”.  Published by Thomas Whittaker, New York which can be downloaded at: http://www.archive.org/details/sthelenahistoric00jackrich

Philip Gosse described this book as “a work of full of useful information but sadly in need of “editing”  It lacks an index and though profusely illustrated by photographs, far too many being of groups of British soldiers who guarded the Boer prisoners.  Undue space is allotted to this subject in the text.  All the same it is a useful work of reference”.  Gosse does give her some credit for being “a woman remarkable for her energy and her gift for organisation”.  “St. Helena stands today (1938) in sore need of such another helper.  Emily died in Capetown in 1923.

Gosse’s own book St. Helena 1502-1938 was described, by The Sunday Times at its publication in 1938, as “A well documented, enthusiastic and easily read book permanently valuable”  The Illustrated London News agreed.  ”Mr Gosse writes like a romantic, a humorist and a scholar.”  He died of salmonella poisoning in Cambridge in October 1959.

Alexander Schulenburg’s 1999 analysis of Emily’s efforts was that: Although her work is much valued for its documentary extracts and photographs, the book as a whole is terribly ill-organised.  For all intents and purposes, Jackson had done what the historian Finberg has called paying "homage to the muse of history after their fashion by serving up the contents of their notebooks in a kind of substitute for narrative”

In fact much like these blog pages, but for my part I enjoyed reading, and learnt much from, both.

On June 1st 1902 St. Helena received news of the war’s end on receiving the cable "Peace," though with no mention of terms.  Prisoners and British were alike loud in their demonstrations, and the stock of champagne in the island was speedily lessened.  The British were confident the Peace was in their favour.  The prisoners also were quite as confident they had at last gained their independence but on the following day came the terms, and with them the downfall of the Boers' hopes.

On Sunday, June 8, thanksgiving services for Peace were offered in the Churches.  At the Cathedral a detachment of Royal Garrison Artillery, who had returned from South Africa, attended, and instead of the usual organ music, the Band of the Buffs accompanied the hymns, and played the National Anthem.  After service the Artillery lined up near Plantation House, when the Governor distributed to them the medals and clasps won in South Africa, and made them a most impressive speech.  After the declaration of Peace and publication throughout the camps of the terms by which the war was ended, notices were posted in English and Dutch throughout the island, and arrangements made for the taking of an oath of allegiance to Great Britain.

NOTICE,

From and after Wednesday, 18th inst., those burghers of the late Orange Free State and South African Republic who are desirous of taking the oath of allegiance to His Majesty King Edward VII are directed to attend at the Court House, Jamestown, between the hours of 11 to 1 p.m., and from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. daily, Sundays and Coronation Day (26th June) excepted.  Permits for this purpose will be granted by Commandants at each camp. The oath of allegiance will be administered by Col. AJ Price, CMG, and Capt. John Proctor, CGA., who have been appointed Special Commissioners.

The Castle St. Helena 14th June 1902.

The taking of the Oath was more universal than had been anticipated, though several hung back; having been urged not to take it.

Boers on Parade being addressed by The Governor prior to embarkation June 26th 1902

On the 25th June the “Canada” arrived from England and the following day there was great excitement in the town, when over 470 who had taken the oath came from the camp to embark on the Canada for South Africa.  They were escorted by the band of the 3rd Wilts, and they marched down with Union Jacks flying and prior to boarding they assembled on the Lower Parade where the Governor bade them farewell.  He said he was glad to have an opportunity of saying good-bye, and of wishing them good luck in the future.  It was a mark of regard on the side of the Government that they were being sent home first, and on arrival at the Cape they would meet the loyalists from Ceylon, and so the first one thousand men to land on their native shores would be those in whom the Government felt confidence.  Had all been of their opinion, and refrained from countenancing a hopeless contest, their country would not have been in the same sad condition as it now was.  He felt sure, however, that under the firm and just rule of England prosperity would come again, and that all would be firm friends.  His Excellency concluded by saying: "I trust we shall always be friends and grow in prosperity day by day.  You have been here now over two years and we part with you with regret.  We have admired the fortitude and constancy with which you have borne exceptional trials, and I feel that amongst you I am parting with some personal friends of whose welfare in the future I shall always be glad to hear.  And now I bid you all good-bye, and wish you all good fortune in the years to come." This was translated in short sentences to the prisoners by Captain Proctor, and was replied to by Commandant Jooste on behalf of himself and his fellow loyalists.  He thanked the Governor for all his kindness to them, and then with three cheers for the King, three again for the Governor, and another three for Colonel Wright and other officers, they marched down the parade along the wharf, headed by the band playing " Auld Lang Syne."  They were hardly able to control their excitement at the thought of seeing all those from whom they had been so long parted and of reaching their native shores after their tedious and enforced exile.

On July 4 His Excellency received a deputation from the German residents of Deadwood Camp.  Lieut.-Colonel Hind, Camp Commandant, introduced the deputation, and Colonel von Braun presented a beautifully carved casket containing an illuminated address, which was read out by Captain Weiss:

Deadwood Camp June 24th, 1902.

To His Excellency R. A. Sterndale, Governor of St. Helena.

Having heard that peace has been proclaimed and that the prisoners of war are soon to leave the island, the undersigned take the liberty of addressing your Excellency.  In the first place we wish to express our heartfelt thanks for the kindness and consideration shown to the prisoners of war by your Excellency in issuing to the inhabitants of the island a seasonable proclamation exhorting them to treat us with the respect due to an honourable foe.  Secondly, we beg your Excellency to convey to the inhabitants of the island our sincerest thanks for the noble manner in which they have responded to your Excellency's appeal.  The kindness shown to the prisoners of war one and all by the people of the island, with very few exceptions, is a fact which will long be remembered and cherished by them as a bright speck in the gloomy days of captivity in St. Helena. We have the honour to remain, Your Excellency's obedient servants.

Having received the address, His Excellency replied:

It is a most agreeable surprise, for which I thank you very much, to receive from you this beautifully illuminated address in such an elegantly carved casket, both of which will always be carefully preserved by me and my family as a valued memento of the past two years.

I thank you heartily, on behalf of myself and the inhabitants of St. Helena, for the kindly sentiments conveyed in the address, and I trust that those friendly feelings which have grown up by the intercourse of the past two years will continue to our lives' end, and bear good fruit in helping to bind our two nations in closer bonds of friendship.  As the time of your departure approaches, I feel I lose some personal friends, who will not, I trust, forget me in the time to come and to you all I wish good fortune in the future, and a bright, happy meeting at home with those who are so anxiously looking out for a re-union after the weary time, which has now, I am glad to say, passed.

On June 30 General Cronje came into the town, accompanied by his secretary, to the Castle, and there took the oath of allegiance.  At his own request, his guard, which had never been withdrawn, was allowed to remain, as many of the prisoners, still obdurate, were very bitter against him.  On August 22 he left the island for the Cape in the transport Tagus, with 994 other prisoners.  Many incidents tend to show the good feeling which sprung up between the prisoners and the military staff in St. Helena.  To Dr. Casey, who was in charge of the medical ward at Deadwood Camp, was presented a very handsome album by some of his Boer patients

Before leaving for South Africa a public letter was written by the prisoners to the St. Helena Guardian. In this they say:  We find it impossible to leave St. Helena unless we contribute our share of thankfulness to His Majesty's officers placed over us from time to time, for what they have done to make us take courage to fight the future.  Much is owed to His Majesty's officers for the kindness and consideration accorded by them since January 12th, 1901, and the conclusion has been made that the prisoners of war have been squarely and gentlemanly treated.  The calm Lieut.-Col. Paget ; the placid and collected Lieut.-Col. Barclay and Hind; the manly attitude taken up by Col. Price, the even and courteous Lt. Garden, will never be forgotten ; nor will they ever cease to respect the genial Captain Meiklejohn and his staff.  Our heartfelt thanks go to the gentlemen mentioned for the kind and courteous way they have received and met us from time to time kindness that was a sweet drop in our bitter glass.  Their general attitude towards us prisoners of war will always be recounted with pleasure an attitude at once firm and manly, and worthy of admiration and why?  Because politeness was evinced in all their actions and doings.

In September the special court was closed.

NOTICE.

Notice is hereby given that by order of H. E. the Governor, Colonel AJ Price, the special Court constituted for administering Oath, or taking declaration of allegiance to His Majesty King Edward VII by the burghers of the late South African Republic and Orange Free State will close on Saturday next, the 6th of September, 1902, at 12 o'clock noon.

By Order,

JOHN PROCTOR, Captain, Jamestown 2nd Sept. 1902,

By this time very few remained obdurate concerning the oath, and the greater number had already embarked after their enforced stay of considerably over two years.  The Golconda in October took the last batch, who travelled back as British subjects to the two republics which had become part and parcel of the British Empire.

Jackson lists the ships conveying the prisoners as follows:

Canada left St. Helena on June 26, taking 370 (Peace Camp) and 110 others.

Kirkfield left St. Helena on July 7, taking 11.

Goorkha left St. Helena on July 25, taking French prisoners to Europe.

Abaka left St. Helena on August 1st, taking 20 prisoners of war,

Avondale Castle left St. Helena in August, taking 20 prisoners of war.

Tagus left St. Helena on August 21, taking 994 prisoners of war.

Canada left St. Helena on August 21, taking 984 prisoners of war.

Malta left St. Helena on August 30, taking 990 prisoners of war.

Goorkha left St. Helena on September 18, taking 12 prisoners of war,

Orotava left St. Helena on October 8, taking 990 prisoners of war,

Braemar Castle left St. Helena on October 12, taking 2 prisoners of war.

Golconda left St. Helena on October 21, taking remainder, but leaving the Cape rebels and a few unpardoned men still on the island.



Jamestown Memorial Fountain, 1891

Installed in September 1891 at the top of Main Street in memory of those who died in the April 19th 1890 Rockfall.  Manufactured in Cast Iron by Walter Macfarlane and Co at the Saracen Foundry in Glasgow.  This photograph looks like it was taken in the Grand Parade prior to final installation.  Reported to have been removed and dumped circa 1990.  For further details and photograph attribution see: www.scottishironwork.org/catdetail.asp?ironid=26431

Main Street, Fountain and the Officers' Mess, now the Post Office

Memorial Fountain Main Street. 

The Bullock Cart was normal at the time, the first motor car, an Austin Seven, was imported only in 1929 by, according to Quentin Keynes, Mr. Solomon.

The two photoraphs above are from the 1903 English edition of Jackson, E. L. St Helena: The Historic Island, Ward, Lock & Co, London.  The 1905 US Edition can be downloaded at:  http://www.archive.org/details/sthelenahistoric00jackrich