The Union of South Africa was aunitary state, rather than afederation like Canada and Australia, with each colony's parliaments being abolished and replaced withprovincial councils.[5] Abicameral parliament was created, consisting of theHouse of Assembly andSenate, with members of the parliament being elected mostly by the country's white minority.[6] During the course of the Union, the franchise changed on several occasions always to suit the needs of the government of the day.[7]Parliamentary sovereignty was a convention of the constitution, inherited from the United Kingdom; save for procedural safeguards in respect of the entrenched sections of franchise and language, the courts were unable to intervene in Parliament's decisions.[8]
The Union initially remained under theBritish Crown as a self-governingdominion of theBritish Empire. With the passage of theStatute of Westminster in 1931, the Union and other dominions became equal in status to the United Kingdom, and the Parliament of the United Kingdom could no longer legislate on behalf of them.[13] This had the effect of making the Union and the other dominionsde jure sovereign nations. TheStatus of the Union Act, passed by the South African Parliament in 1934, incorporated the applicable portions of the Statute of Westminster into South African law, underscoring its status as a sovereign nation. It removed what remaining authority Whitehall had to legislate for South Africa, as well as any nominal role that the United Kingdom had in grantingRoyal Assent. The governor-general was now required to sign or veto bills passed by Parliament, without the option of seeking advice from London.
The monarch was represented in South Africa by agovernor-general, while effective power was exercised by the Executive Council, headed by theprime minister.[14]Louis Botha, formerly aBoer general, was appointed the first prime minister of the Union, heading a coalition representing the whiteAfrikaner and English-speakingBritish diaspora communities.
Prosecutions before courts were instituted in the name of the Crown (cited in the formatRex / Regina v Accused) and government officials served in the name of the Crown.
Most English-speaking whites in South Africa supported theUnited Party ofJan Smuts, which favoured close relations with the United Kingdom and theCommonwealth, unlike the Afrikaans-speakingNational Party, which had held anti-British sentiments and was opposed to South Africa's intervention in theSecond World War.[16] Some Nationalist organisations, like theOssewabrandwag, were openly supportive ofNazi Germany during theSecond World War.[17] Additionally, most English-speaking South Africans were opposed to the creation of arepublic, many of them voting "no" in the 5 October 1960referendum. But due to the much larger number of Afrikaans-speaking voters, the referendum passed, leading to the establishment of a republic on 31 May 1961.[18] The government led by the National Party consequently withdrew South Africa from the Commonwealth.[19][18] Following the results of the referendum, some whites in Natal, which had an English-speaking majority, called for secession from the Union.[20] Five years earlier, some 33,000 Natalians had signed theNatal Covenant in opposition to the plans for a republic.[21]
Subsequently, the National Party government had passed aConstitution that repealed theSouth Africa Act. The features of the Union were carried over with very little change to the newly formed Republic. The decision to transform from a Union to Republic was narrowly decided in the referendum. The decision together with the South African Government's insistence on adhering to its policy ofapartheid resulted in South Africa'sde facto expulsion from theCommonwealth of Nations.[19]
Encyclopedia Britannica Films documentary about South Africa from 1956
TheSouth Africa Act dealt with race in two specific provisions. First it entrenched the liberal (by South African standards)Cape Qualified Franchise system of theCape Colony which operated free of any racial considerations (although due to socio-economic restrictions no real political expression of non-whites was possible).[22][23] The CapePrime Minister at the time,John X. Merriman, fought hard, but ultimately unsuccessfully, to extend this system of multi-racial franchise to the rest of South Africa.
Second it made "native affairs" a matter for the national government. The practice therefore was to establish aMinister of Native Affairs.
According to Stephen Howe, "colonialism in some cases—most obviously among white minorities in South Africa—meant mainly that these violent settlers wanted to maintain more racial inequalities than the colonial empire found just".[24]
SirGeorge Grey, theGovernor of Cape Colony from 1854 to 1861, decided that unifying the states of southern Africa would be mutually beneficial. The stated reasons were that he believed that political divisions between the white-controlled states "weakened them against the natives", threatened an ethnic divide between British and Boer, and left the Cape vulnerable to interference from other European powers. He believed that a united "South African Federation", under British control, would resolve all three of these concerns.[25]
His idea was greeted with cautious optimism in southern Africa; theOrange Free State agreed to the idea in principle and theTransvaal may also eventually have agreed. However, he was overruled by theBritish Colonial Office which ordered him to desist from his plans. His refusal to abandon the idea eventually led to him being recalled.
Holiday Time in Cape Town (1891-1899) depicted an imagined future united South Africa at a time when the idea was being widely debated in the Cape Colony.
In the 1870s, the London Colonial Office, underSecretary for the ColoniesLord Carnarvon, decided to apply a system ofconfederation onto southern Africa. On this occasion, however, it was largely rejected by southern Africans, primarily due to its very bad timing. The various component states ofsouthern Africa were still simmering after the last bout of British expansion, and inter-state tensions were high. TheOrange Free State this time refused to even discuss the idea, and Prime MinisterJohn Molteno of theCape Colony called the idea badly informed and irresponsible. In addition, many local leaders resented the way it was imposed from outside without understanding of local issues.[26] TheConfederation model was also seen as unsuitable for the disparate entities ofsouthern Africa, with their wildly different sizes, economies and political systems.[27]
The Molteno Unification Plan (1877), put forward by the Cape government as a more feasibleunitary alternative toconfederation, largely anticipated the final act of Union in 1909. A crucial difference was that the Cape's liberal constitution and multiracial franchise were to be extended to the other states of the union. These smaller states would gradually accede to the much largerCape Colony through a system of treaties, whilst simultaneously gaining elected seats in theCape parliament. The entire process would be locally driven, with Britain's role restricted to policing any set-backs. While subsequently acknowledged to be more viable, this model was rejected at the time by London.[28] At the other extreme, another powerful Cape politician at the time,Saul Solomon, proposed an extremely loose system of federation, with the component states preserving their very different constitutions and systems of franchise.[29]
Lord Carnarvon rejected the (more informed) local plans for unification, as he wished to have the process brought to a conclusion before the end of his tenure and, having little experience of southern Africa, he preferred to enforce the more familiar model of confederation used in Canada. He pushed ahead with his Confederation plan, which unraveled as predicted, leaving a string of destructive wars across southern Africa. These conflicts eventually fed into the first and secondAnglo-Boer Wars, with far-reaching consequences for the subcontinent.[30]
After the discovery of gold in the 1880s, thousands of British immigrants flocked to the gold mines of theTransvaal Republic and theOrange Free State. The newly arrived miners, though needed for the mines, were distrusted by the politically dominant Afrikaners, who called them "uitlanders", imposed heavy taxes on them and granted them very limited civil rights, with no right to vote. The British government, interested in profiting from the gold and diamond mines there and highly protective of its own citizens, demanded reforms, which the Afrikaners rejected. A small-scale private British effort to overthrow Transvaal's PresidentPaul Kruger, theJameson Raid of 1895, proved a fiasco, and presaged full-scale conflict as diplomatic efforts all failed.[31][32][33]
The Second Boer War started on 11 October 1899 and ended on 31 May 1902. The United Kingdom gained the support of its Cape Colony, of its Colony of Natal and of some African allies. Volunteers from across the British Empire further supplemented the British war effort. All other nations remained neutral, but public opinion in them was largely hostile to Britain. Inside Britain and its Empire there was also significantopposition to the Second Boer War, spearheaded byanti-war activists such asEmily Hobhouse.[34]
At the onset of the war, the British were both overconfident about the chances of success in a military confrontation with the Boer republics and underprepared for a long-term conflict. British Prime MinisterLord Salisbury and members ofhis cabinet, in particularColonial SecretaryJoseph Chamberlain, ignored repeated warnings that Boer forces were more powerful than previous reports had suggested. In the last months of 1899, Boer forces launched the first attacks of the war, besieging the British-held settlements ofLadysmith,Kimberley andMafeking, andwinning several engagements against British troops atColenso,Magersfontein andStormberg. However, by the next year the British soon organised an effective response to these attacks, lifting the three sieges and winning several battles against Boer forces. The British, now deploying approximately 400,000 soldiers from across their colonial empire, successfully invaded and occupied the Boer republics. NumerousBoer soldiers refused to surrender andtook to the countryside to carry outguerrilla operations against the British, who responded by implementingscorched earth tactics. These tactics included interning Afrikaner civilians from the Boer republics inconcentration camps (in which roughly 28,000 people died) and destroying homesteads owned by Afrikaners to flush out the guerillas and deny them a base of civilian support. Using these tactics combined with a system of blockhouses and barriers to seal off Boer holdouts, the British were able to gradually track down and defeat the guerillas. In the 1902Treaty of Vereeniging, the British formally annexed the Boer republics into theCape Colony, ending the war.[35]
TheBhambatha Rebellion was a rebellion by theZulu against colonial rule in theColony of Natal in 1906. It saw around 3000-4000 Zulus killed by the British, and popularised the thought among colonisers that the unification of the colonies was necessary to maintainwhite supremacy.[36]
TheNational Convention was aconstitutional convention held between 1908 and 1909 inDurban (12 October to 5 November 1908),Cape Town (23 November to 18 December 1908, 11 January to 3 February 1909) andBloemfontein (3 to 11 May 1909).[37] This convention led to theBritish Parliament's adoption of theSouth Africa Act, which ratified the Union. The four colonies that would become South Africa were represented, along with a delegation fromRhodesia. The 33 delegates assembled behind closed doors, in the fear that a public affair would lead delegates to refuse compromising on contentious areas. The delegates drew up a constitution that would, subject to some amendments by the British government, become the South Africa Act. This was South Africa's constitution between 1910 and 1961, when the country became arepublic under theConstitution of 1961.
In 1922 the colony ofSouthern Rhodesia had a chance (but ultimately rejected) to join the Union through areferendum. The referendum resulted from the fact that by 1920British South Africa Company rule in Southern Rhodesia was no longer practical with many favouring some form of 'responsible government'. Some favoured responsible government within Southern Rhodesia while others (especially inMatabeleland) favoured membership of the Union of South Africa. PoliticianSir Charles Coghlan claimed that such membership with the Union would make Southern Rhodesia the "Ulster of South Africa".[38]
Prior to the referendum, representatives of Southern Rhodesia visited Cape Town where the Prime Minister of South Africa,Jan Smuts, eventually offered terms he considered reasonable and which the United Kingdom government found acceptable. Although opinion among the United Kingdom government, the South African government and the British South Africa Company favoured the union option (and none tried to interfere in the referendum), when the referendum was held the results saw 59.4% in favour of responsible government for a separate colony and 40.6% in favour of joining the Union of South Africa.[citation needed]
The inhospitable coast of what is nowNamibia remained uncolonised up until the end of the 19th century.
From 1874, the leaders of several Indigenous peoples, notablyMaharero of theHerero nation, approached theCape Parliament to the south. Anticipating invasion by a European power and already sufferingPortuguese encroachment from the north andAfrikaner encroachment from the south, these leaders approached theCape Colony government to discuss the possibility of accession and the political representation it would entail. Accession to the Cape Colony, a self-governing state with asystem of multi-racial franchise and legal protection for traditional land rights, was at the time considered marginally preferable to annexation by either theKingdom of Portugal or theGerman Empire.
In response, theCape Parliament appointed a special Commission underWilliam Palgrave, to travel to the territory between theOrange andCunene rivers and to confer with these leaders regarding accession to the Cape. In the negotiations with thePalgrave Commission, some indigenous nations such as theDamara and the Herero responded positively (October 1876), other reactions were mixed. Discussions regarding the magisterial structure for the area's political integration into the Cape dragged on until, from 1876, it was blocked by Britain. Britain relented, insofar as allowing the Cape to incorporateWalvis Bay as an exclave, which was brought under the magisterial district ofCape Town, but when the Germans established a protectorate over the area in 1884, South West Africa was predominantly autonomous.[39][40][41]
Following the outbreak of theFirst World War in 1914, the Union of South Africa occupied and annexed[42] the German colony ofGerman South West Africa. With the establishment of theLeague of Nations and cessation of the war, South Africa obtained aClass C Mandate to administer South West Africa "under the laws of the mandatory (South Africa) as integral portions of its territory".[43] Subsequently, the Union of South Africa generally regarded South West Africa as a fifth province, although this was never an official status.
With the creation of theUnited Nations, the Union applied for the incorporation of South West Africa, but its application was rejected by the U.N., which invited South Africa to prepare aTrusteeship agreement instead. This invitation was in turn rejected by the Union, which subsequently did not modify the administration of South West Africa and continued to adhere to the original mandate. This caused a complex set of legal wranglings that were not finalised when the Union was replaced with the Republic of South Africa. In 1949, the Union passed a law bringing South West Africa into closer association with it including giving South West Africa representation in the South African parliament.
Walvis Bay, which is now inNamibia, was originally a part of the Union of South Africa as anexclave as it was a part of the Cape Colony at the time of Unification. In 1921, Walvis Bay was integrated with the Class C Mandate over South West Africa for the rest of the Union's duration and for part of the republican era.
TheStatute of Westminster passed by theBritish Parliament in December 1931, which repealed theColonial Laws Validity Act and implemented theBalfour Declaration 1926, had a profound impact on the constitutional structure and status of the Union. The most notable effect was that the South African Parliament was released from many restrictions concerning the handling of the so-called "native question". However, the repeal was not sufficient to enable the South African Parliament to ignore the entrenched clauses of its constitution (theSouth Africa Act) which led to thecoloured-vote constitutional crisis of the 1950s wherein the right of coloureds to vote in the main South African Parliament was removed and replaced with a separate, segregated, and largely powerless assembly.[citation needed]
^Howe, Stephen (2002).Empire A very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 75.
^V.C. Malherbe:What They Said. 1795–1910 History Documents. Cape Town: Maskew Miller. 1971.
^P.A. Molteno:A Federal South Africa. Sampson Low, Marston & Co, 1896.ISBN1-4367-2682-4
^Phyllis Lewsen (ed.).Selections from the correspondence of John X. Merriman, 1905–1924. South Africa:Van Riebeeck Society, 1969
^Frank Richardson Cana:South Africa: From the Great Trek to the Union. London: Chapman & Hall, ltd., 1909. Chapter VII "Molteno's Unification Plan". p.89
^Solomon, W. E. C:Saul Solomon – the Member for Cape Town. Cape Town: Oxford University Press, 1948.
^Illustrated History of South Africa. The Reader's Digest Association South Africa (Pty) Ltd, 1992.ISBN0-947008-90-X. p.182, "Confederation from the Barrel of a Gun"
^J.A.S.Grenville,Lord Salisbury, and Foreign Policy (1964) pp 235–64.
^Iain R. Smith,The Origins of the South African War, 1899–1902 (1996).
^William L. Langer,The Diplomacy of Imperialism (1950), pp. 605–28, 651–76
^Judd, Denis; Surridge, Keith (2002).The Boer War: A History (revised ed.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing (published 2013). pp. 1–54.ISBN9780857722317. Retrieved19 December 2019.
^Judd, Denis; Surridge, Keith (2002).The Boer War: A History (revised ed.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing (published 2013). pp. 55–302.ISBN9780857722317. Retrieved19 December 2019.
^Minutes of Proceedings with Annexures (Selected) of the South African National Convention held at Durban, Cape Town and Bloemfontein, 12th October, 1908, to 11th May, 1909. Cape Town: Cape Times Limited Government Printers. 1910.
^P. A. Molteno:The life and times of Sir John Charles Molteno, K. C. M. G., First Premier of Cape Colony, Comprising a History of Representative Institutions and Responsible Government at the Cape. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1900. Vol.I. p.284.
1 Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei were originally part of South Africa; they later declared independence with South African consent in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Their independence was recognized by the South African government but they were internationally recognized as part of South Africa.
24Claimed in 1908; territory formed 1962; overlaps portions of Argentine and Chilean claims, borders not enforced but claim not renounced under theAntarctic Treaty.
.svg)
.svg)
_(orthographic_projection).svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
