If This Be Treason. Helen Joseph

of the African National Congress. Banned by the government from attending gatherings, confined to the magisterial district of Tugela, Chief Luthuli has continued to play his true role as leader of his people. But he, too, in December 1956, was arrested for high treason. He was amongst the 65 against whom the charge was withdrawn at the end of the Preparatory Examination.

      In 1961 this man of strength and wisdom, already enthroned in the hearts of his people, was awarded one of the highest honours the world has to bestow, the Nobel Peace Prize. “I find it hard to believe,” said Chief, “that in this distressed and heavily laden world I could be counted amongst those whose efforts have made a notable contribution to the welfare of mankind.” But to millions of people it wasn’t hard to believe at all.

      Dedicated to militant non-violence, Chief Luthuli feels that “to engage in any other method might bring bloodshed”. “To gain freedom without bloodshed,” he says, “is much the better way.”

      In his evidence-in-chief, Chief Luthuli set out clearly the principles of the African National Congress: to achieve equality for all people, to work for the unity of all people and to conduct a non-violent struggle. He had testified to his own belief in the innate goodness of man, to his hope of moral persuasion and his belief in the effectiveness of economic pressure. “Pressure on self-interests should lead to ultimate pressure on the government to accord with the wishes of the people.” He thought there was still goodwill towards whites but that it was becoming limited as the years passed. He believed strongly in goodness and that the white man could be won over, not however by acts of supplication only; that had long been discarded. The African National Congress must continue to appeal to the white man but must also hit his purse so that in his own interest he would approach Parliament.

      Mr Justice Rumpff: “Do you equate innate goodness with the purse?”

      Chief Luthuli, with dignity: “No, the purse is enlightened self-interest.”

      In clear, simple language he explained the reaction of the African people to their conditions, to the legislation that affected them so harshly, to apartheid. It was difficult for anyone to understand apartheid intellectually. “It is only when you feel it.” Bantu Education, he saw, was designed to give an inferior education to fit Africans for their “station in life”.

      “I know my station in life,” said Chief Luthuli, “and I don’t like it.”

      The policy of the African National Congress had always been to oppose the Pass laws. He did not agree that the pass could be any sort of protection.

      “It has been said that when I am dead I can be identified by my pass. What does that mean to me?” he asked bitterly.

      Chief Luthuli emphasised that non-violence was the basic policy of the African National Congress; only the National Conference, the supreme body of the African National Congress, could change the policy. “ . . . But,” he said, “I have heard no suggestion to change that policy, not a whisper.” He would have opposed such a suggestion, firstly on personal grounds, secondly because it would not be in the interests of the liberation movement. “It is not a practical thing.”

      Chief Luthulli stressed the need for people to develop a spiritual defiance to anything contrary to human dignity. There should be a spirit of internal defiance, “divine discontent”, but he made it clear that he himself was no pacifist. He had a great respect for past leaders, such as Ahintsa. “I, for one, have the greatest respect for our past leaders; when their territories were attacked by the whites coming into the country, they did not merely just stand by and allow their land to be taken, or to lose their freedom.” Such men were an inspiration to the coming generations, even though different methods were used. He explained that there was a difference between pacifism and non-violence, for there were situations where there must be resistance, as in the two World Wars. If a country was attacked it defended itself. Chief Luthuli explained that the African National Congress sought to remove race prejudice, which was the evil of South Africa. “So far as we are concerned we stand for an undivided South Africa, and then therefore we look forward to the whole of South Africa being multi-racial.” The African National Congress fought for franchise rights for all, and other rights that were not being enjoyed by the non-Europeans.

      Mr Maisels: “Do you struggle for universal franchise?”

      “Yes.”

      Mr Maisels: “Do you believe in full democracy?”

      “We do, My Lords.”

      Mr Maisels: “Do you believe in parliamentary democracy?”

      “We do, My Lords. We attack the South Africa Act in so far as it does not give us rights.”

      Dealing with the question of land, Chief Luthuli explained that it is a vital issue for the African people.

      “To us,” said Chief Luthuli, “it is a painful thing and all along the African National Congress has taken a strong stand in claiming our rights to land. Being dispossessed of land is almost to be dispossessed of life itself.”