6. “Article XIV of the Convention of London, 1884,” Appendix A, BSP, C-7911, p. 434 (1895).
7. “Law respecting Coolies, Arabs, and other Asiatics (No. 3, 1885),” as amended, Staats Courant, No. 621, November 23, 1898 (emphasis supplied).
8. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 25.
9. “Law respecting Coolies, Arabs, and other Asiatics (No. 3, 1885),” as amended, Appendix A, BSP, C-7911, p. 440 (1895) (emphasis supplied).
10. Ismail Suleiman & Co. vs. Landdrost of Middelburg, II Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the South African Republic (Transvaal) 244 (August 14, 1888) (hereinafter Suleiman).
11. Ibid.
12. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 25.
13. In arbitration, parties voluntarily submit to the authority of a neutral third party, who decides the case. Arbitration is binding when parties agree that the arbitrator’s decision is final and cannot be appealed.
14. CWMG 1:210.
15. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 36.
16. “Explanation of the so-called Coolie Question now pending between Her Majesty’s Government and the Government of the South African Republic,” BSP, C-7911, pp. 393, 392 (1895).
17. See “Affidavit of Ibrahim Mahomed Patel,” BSP, C-7911, pp. 417–418 (1895).
18. “Case to be submitted to the Arbitrator on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government,” BSP, C-7911, pp. 391, 390 (1895).
19. “Bloemfontein Award,” BSP, C-7911, p. 398 (1895).
20. “Reasons of the Arbitrator for his Award,” BSP, C-7911, p. 409 (1895).
21. “Bloemfontein Award,” BSP, C-7911, p. 412 (1895).
22. Ibid., p. 413.
23. CWMG 3:68.
24. Gandhi calls this petition a “memorial.” CWMG 1:197–198.
25. CWMG 1:201.
26. CWMG 1:208.
27. CWMG 1 (1969 edition): 212. “Kaffir” is a pejorative term for a native person. Gandhi later repeats the odious comparison of Indians to natives in a petition to Lord Elgin, viceroy and governor-general of India; see CWMG 1:219.
28. The Collected Works attributes this sentiment to Gandhi. CWMG 3:76.
29. CWMG 3:68.
30. CWMG 2:50.
31. See Brown, Prisoner of Hope, 205 et seq.; Autobiography, 397 et seq.
32. Of nonviolence, King said: “Christ furnished the spirit and motivation, while Gandhi furnished the method.” Washington (ed.), A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr., (Harper & Row: San Francisco, 1986), 17.
33. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 59 et seq.
34. CWMG 1:254.
35. CWMG 3:86.
36. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 63–64.
37. “Law respecting Coolies, Arabs and other Asiatics,” Enclosure 2 in No. 6, Appendix A,” BSP, C-7911, p. 441 (1895).
38. CWMG 3:8.
39. See Hahlo and Kahn, The Union of South Africa; and Chanock, The Making of South African Legal Culture, 1902–1936: Fear, Favour and Prejudice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).
40. Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803).
41. Tayob Hajee Khan Mohamed v. The Government of the South African Republic (F. W. Reitz, N.O.), V Reports of the Cases Decided in the High Court of the South African Republic 168 (1898) (hereinafter Mohamed v. Government).
42. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 77.
43. Mohamed v. Government.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
First epigraph, page 159: “Transvaal Legislative Council: Asiatic Bazaar Question,” IO, December 31, 1903.
Second epigraph, page 159: CWMG 4 (1960 edition): 123.
1. Of this time, Donald Denoon has written that there is “an unusually great temptation to interpret Transvaal affairs in terms of personalities.” Denoon, The Grand Illusion (London: Longman, 1973), xiii.
2. CWMG 3:271.
3. Pillay, British Indians in the Transvaal, 77.
4. CWMG 3:271.
5. CWMG 3:292.
6. CWMG 3:278.
7. CWMG 3:282.
8. Autobiography, 261.
9. CWMG 4:282.
10. See Chanock, The Making of South African Legal Culture, 222–224.
11. Autobiography, 365.
12. Ibid., 261.
13. Order of Court, Supreme Court of the Transvaal, Ex Parte Gandhi, April 14, 1903, on file with the Incorporated Law Society of the Transvaal.
14. Council of the Incorporated Law Society of the Transvaal, minutes of April 14, 1903, meeting.
15. “Meeting of Legal Practitioners: This Afternoon, a Strong Protest against the Annual Tax,” JS, April 29, 1903.
16. “The Banns,” TL, September 5, 1906.
17. “Debating Society: An Indian Gentleman Admitted,” RDM, July 7, 1903.
18. The conventional and political aspects of Gandhi’s practice would not be neatly separable, in part because discrimination was omnipresent, even in Gandhi’s property practice. See, for example, “Opinion Letter from Gregorowski to Gandhi,” SN 4069 (July 24, 1903).
19. Autobiography, 256.
20. CWMG 3:283.
21. “Asiatic Permits,” JS, September 22, 1903. The office determined who received permits to enter the colony. CWMG 3:272.
22. One defendant testified that the funds he received came from selling a horse to an Indian permit applicant. “Asiatic Permit Case,” JS, November 25, 1903.
23. Autobiography, 274–275; CWMG 5:383.
24. Autobiography, 274–275.
25. CWMG 3:372.
26. “Opinion of Seward Brice,” SN 3784 (October 9, 1902). Brice’s opinion appears to have been found in Gandhi’s files.
27. At least one other case in which Gandhi was involved raised the same question. See “Letter of Dumat & Davis to Gandhi,” SN 4079 (September 2, 1903); “Letter of Dumat & Davis to Gandhi,” SN 4081 (September 3, 1903); and “Letter of Dumat & Davis to Gandhi,” SN 4082 (September 5, 1903). The case was settled without trial. “Letter of Gandhi to Dumat and Davis,” SN 4087 (September 19, 1903).
28. 1905 Transvaal Law Reports 239 (May 8, 1905), 245.
29. “In the Nature of a Test Case,” IO, May 27, 1905, cited in CWMG 4:450.
30. “Transvaal Legislative Council: Asiatic Bazaar Question,” IO, December 31, 1903.
31. “Asiatic Traders,” TL, December 22, 1903.
32. “Transvaal Legislative Council: Asiatic Bazaar Question,” IO, December 31, 1903.
33. CWMG 4:143.
34. “The Capital: Pretoria Day By Day—Asiatic Traders’ Commission,” March 15, 1904, TL.
35. “Asiatic Traders: Why Was the Commission Appointed? Most of the Claims Withdrawn,” RDM, March 18, 1904.
36. Ibid.
37. CWMG 4:157.
38. “Asiatic Traders,” TL, March 25, 1904.
39. CWMG 4:143–144, 195–196. See also “Asiatic Traders’ Commission,” TL, March 18, 1904.
40. “Asiatic Traders: Why Was the Commission Appointed? Most of the Claims Withdrawn,” RDM, March 18, 1904.
41. “A New Year’s Gift,” IO, January 14, 1904.
42. Ibid.
43. CWMG 4:117. See also CWMG 4:183.
44. CWMG 4:67.
45. CWMG 4:182.
46. Mohamed v. Government.
47. Motan v. Government.
48. CWMG 4:190.
49. “Asiatic Trading,” RDM, June 8, 1904.
50. “Self-Sacrifice,” IO, January 21, 1904.
51. Ibid.
52. CWMG 3:352.
53. Gandhi had his client’s permission to make the loan. Autobiography, 267–268. In March 1905 Gandhi drew up a bond securing a loan from Budree (“Badri” in the Autobiography) to the restaurateur. “Notarial Bond,” SN 4225 (March 4, 1904). The restaurant failed a few months later. See CWMG 5:33.
54. Gandhi’s work for Budree is illustrative. He performed wide-ranging work for him, much of it appearing to be property
-related. The Sabarmati Ashram archive contains evidence of this aspect of Gandhi’s practice. See, for example, “Letter of Budree to M. K. Gandhi,” SN 4318a (January 24, 1905). There is also evidence of Gandhi’s continuing, extensive work for Budree in the Collected Works. See, for example, CWMG 9 (1963 edition): 485.
55. CWMG 4:363.
56. With respect to the burden of his public work and his private practice, Gandhi wrote that “at present, I have to work from nearly a quarter of nine in the morning to ten o’clock at night, with intervals for meals and a short walk.” CWMG 4:352.
57. CWMG 5:75.
58. CWMG 4:332. In his autobiography Gandhi states that at one point he was contributing £75 a month, “practically sinking all [his] savings in it.” Autobiography, 286.
59. CWMG 6 (1961 edition): 196.
60. CWMG 3:298.
61. CWMG 3:411.
62. Autobiography, 275–276.
63. A nineteenth-century British lawyer, politician, and reformer.
64. “An Opportunity for the Indians,” IO, October 2, 1903.
65. Autobiography, 365–366.
66. The representation of a factually guilty defendant is justified with the argument that forcing the prosecution to prove guilt safeguards the liberties of all. This rationale does not exist in civil cases.
67. CWMG 5:72.
68. Autobiography, 275.
69. Ibid., 265. Gandhi refers here to Snell, The Principles of Equity Intended for the Use of Students and Practitioners, 6th ed. (London: Stevens & Haynes, 1882).
70. CWMG 5:167.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
Epigraph, page 180: “The Colour Question,” TL, February 16, 1906.
1. Trams resemble trolleys on fixed tracks.
2. The system first opened in 1891 with no regulations in place. Spit and Patton, Johannesburg Tramways: A History of the Tramways of the City of Johannesburg (London: Light Railway Transport League, 1976), 11.
3. “Town Council,” TL, February 15, 1906.
4. “The Colour Question,” TL, February 16, 1906.
5. “Letter to Town Clerk,” February 10, 1906, CWMG 5 (1961 edition): 186. The Indians became aware of the committee’s recommendations in advance through the tram’s manager.
6. CWMG 5:206.
7. Ibid. MacIntyre, a Scot, was a theosophist whom Gandhi had taken into his office. Autobiography, 306; CWMG 6:67. MacIntyre also identified himself as a bookkeeper for Gandhi. CWMG 8 (1962 edition): 416. Coovadia was treasurer of the British Indian Association at this time. “Traffic By-Laws,” TL, May 19, 1906.
8. See “Indians on Trams,” RDM, May 19, 1906.
9. CWMG 5:230.
10. Musiker and Musiker, Historical Dictionary of Greater Johannesburg (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 1999), 130.
11. “Unless the . . . cars are kept exclusively for white[s] . . . the . . . system will be boycotted by them and be a colossal failure.” “Indians on Tram Cars,” TL, May 19, 1906.
12. “A Tram Car Case,” JS, May 18, 1906.
13. The regulation stated that “no coloured person shall be allowed to be conveyed in any hired vehicle designated for white persons, and the conveyance of coloured passengers shall be allowed only in trams and omnibuses specially and exclusively licensed therefor.” See “A Tram Car Case,” JS, May 18, 1906.
14. Magistrate Graham Cross appears to have reasoned in the second case not only that the Boer rule had been displaced but that Coovadia was not the type of “coloured” person contemplated by the rule. See “Indians on Trams,” RDM, May 19, 1906.
15. CWMG 5:322.
16. TL cited in “Johannesburg Trams and Coloured People,” IO, February 24, 1906.
17. Polak had recently passed his law certificate examination. See “Facts and Comments,” IO, February 3, 1906. Polak would later serve as acting secretary of the BIA while Gandhi was in London lobbying against the Asiatic Law Amendment Ordinance. “A Noteworthy Appointment,” IO, October 6, 1906.
18. The approach would later be contemplated by Gandhi in the matter of the railway workers’ strike.
19. In May 1907 the government published regulations firmly establishing a segregated system. See CWMG 6:495. The new order would restrict Indians to separate cars. See “A Reply,” IO, July 6, 1907.
20. “Asiatic Policy,” RDM, September 11, 1906.
21. See “Legislative Council: Further Rebukes to Mr Hull: Asiatic Ordinance Passed,” JS, March 22, 1906.
22. Law 38 of 1902. The Peace Preservation Ordinance prevented certain persons from entering or residing in the Transvaal without a permit.
23. Satyagraha, 101. Gandhi took the position later that it was not so much the fingerprints that the Indians resented but forced registration. See CWMG 7:279.
24. Satyagraha, 101.
25. CWMG 5:414.
26. CWMG 5:418.
27. Ibid.
28. “British Indians: A Mass Meeting,” JS, September 11, 1906.
29. “British Indian Protest,” RDM, September 12, 1906.
30. “British Indians,” TL, September 12, 1906.
31. “Some Notes on the Meeting,” IO, September 22, 1906.
32. Satyagraha, 104–107.
33. Indian Opinion gives his name as Ramsundar Pandit and Ram Sundar Pundit. Gandhi writes it as Pandit Rama Sundara. When he himself writes to the Rand Daily Mail, he uses Ramsundar Pundit. The English word “pundit” is derived from the Hindu word for learned person, pandit.
34. Germiston is a Johannesburg suburb.
35. “Asiatic Registration: Well-Known Indian Arrested,” RDM, November 9, 1907.
36. “Asiatic Question: The Germiston Test Case,” JS, November 11, 1907.
37. “Indians Protest: Stores to Be Closed Today,” RDM, November 15, 1907.
38. Ibid.
39. “Asiatic Law: The Germiston Case—Hindu Priest in Court,” TL, November 15, 1907; “Ram Sundar Pundit,” IO, November 23, 1907.
40. As Gandhi explained it: “It took away the personal liberty of every Asiatic coming within . . . the Act. . . . [I]nstead of his being the creature of God only, he became the creature of any official appointed under the Act, and a man believing in God would never even dream of submitting to an Act which really enslaved him.” “Ram Sundar Pandit Interviewed,” IO, November 16, 1907.
41. “Asiatic Registration: Ram Sundar Pundit’s Trial,” JS, November 16, 1907.
42. “Asiatic Law: The Germiston Case—Hindu Priest in Court,” TL, November 15, 1907; “Ram Sundar Pundit,” IO, November 23, 1907.
43. “Asiatic Registration,” TL, November 16, 1907.
44. “Asiatic Law: The Germiston Case—Hindu Priest in Court,” TL, November 15, 1907; “Ram Sundar Pundit,” IO, November 23, 1907; “Indians Protest: Stores to Be Closed Today,” RDM, November 15, 1907.
45. “The Asiatic Law,” TL, November 28, 1907.
46. “Ram Sundar Pundit,” IO [translated from the Gujarati], December 7, 1907.
47. “Johannesburg Letter: Message from Ram Sundar Pundit,” IO, December 7, 1907.
48. “The Asiatics,” TL, December 14, 1907; “Release of Indian Priest,” RDM, December 14, 1907.
49. “The Asiatics,” TL, December 14, 1907; “Release of Indian Priest,” RDM, December 14, 1907.
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
First epigraph, page 197: CWMG 7 (1962 edition): 285.
Second epigraph, page 197: CWMG 7:306.
1. With a grant of responsible government status, a colony enjoyed a relationship with London that offered almost total freedom of action. See, for example, “Our Asiatics,” TL, August 31, 1907.
2. Cited in “Letter from Gandhi and Ally to London Press,” IO, December 29, 1906. Earlier the Rand Daily Mail stated that “Mr. Gandhi’s marshalling [sic] of the facts and his submission of them in printed form betrayed a skilled as well as a determined hand.” RDM cited in “The Deputation Again,” IO, December 8, 1906.
3. “The Indian Peril,” JS, April 29, 1907.
&n
bsp; 4. “The Asiatic Act,” JS, May 4, 1907.
5. “Asiatic Bill,” RDM, March 26, 1907.
6. Satyagraha, 99.
7. “Asiatic Registration,” JS, August 12, 1907.
8. To his brother he complained, “I am so hard pressed for time that I scarcely know what to do.” CWMG 5:334. He confided to Chhaganlal Gandhi that he did not get “a moment’s respite.” CWMG 6:303.
9. Gandhi’s court appearances were as numerous as ever. See, for example, the entries labeled “Civil Judgments” in the Rand Daily Mail in 1906 (March 8, April 12, May 4, June 2, July14, August 21, September 4, October 27) and 1907 (January 8, February 2, March 8, April 19, May 3, June 25, August 10, September 12, October 11) and in the Johannesburg Star (February 3, 1906; August 14, 1907; December 28, 1907). See also Rama and Another v. Rex, 1907 TSCR 949 (October 21, 1907). He even instructed a criminal defense advocate. “Illicit Liquor Traffic,” TL, August 15, 1907.
He also made time to frequent Phoenix, the large rural outpost some fourteen miles from Durban that he had purchased in 1904 and where he had gathered his devotees to publish Indian Opinion. “My original idea had been gradually to retire from practice, go and live in the Settlement, earn my livelihood by manual work there, and find the joy of service in the fulfillment of Phoenix. But it was not to be.” Autobiography, 304.
10. “Durban Notes,” IO, January 12, 1907.
11. CWMG 6:306. See also CWMG 5:412, 6:332, 6:378, 6:383, 6:393, 6:420, 6:456, 6:468, 7:139, and 7:142; “British Indian Association,” TL, May 14, 1907.
12. CWMG 6:448.
13. CWMG 5:418.
14. See, for example, CWMG 6:440, 7:129, and 7:387.
15. CWMG 6:440.
16. CWMG 6:495. These conditions attached to Gandhi’s offer to represent nonregistrants. He also offered to represent nonviolent picketers. CWMG 7:283.
17. CWMG 7:9; CWMG 7:89.
18. CWMG 7:129.
19. From February 1907 to December 1907, Gandhi defended fifty-five resisters in court. Details about these cases, as well as a complete set of endnotes, can be found at disalvo.law.wvu.edu.
20. “Asiatic Law: Mr. Gandhi’s Proposals,” JS, August 19, 1907.
21. “Passive Resisters,”, TL, December 3, 1907.
22. Gandhi had secured a different opinion from Leonard, who believed that no colony possessed power to act beyond its borders. “Opinion of J. W. Leonard and Arthur Hume,” SN 4780 (December 30, 1907).
M.K. Gandhi, Attorney at Law Page 40