Gold in Kenya

Abstract

THE debates on the amendment of the Kenya Native Lands Trust Ordinance in both Houses of Parliament on February 8 did little to remove apprehension as to the manner in which the exclusion of land from the reserves is likely to affect the native population. The motion for papers moved by Lord Lugard in the House of Lords was withdrawn; and the amendment of Mr. Lunn to Mr. Donner's original motion, approving the action of the Government of Kenya in the steps taken to develop the goldfields and safeguard the interests of the natives, was defeated by a majority of 151. The case against the amendment of the Ordinance, as accepted by the Kenya legislature, was stated lucidly by Lord Lugard, who was ably seconded by the Archbishop of Canterbury; while in the House of Commons Sir Robert Hamilton gave an emphatic, but temperately phrased, expression to the feeling of uneasiness which has been aroused by the manner in which the Government has handled the situation. It cannot be said that the Government has given a satisfactory reply to its critics. The main contention, that the exclusion of land from the reserve without a compensating grant of additional land is a breach of faith and will be detrimental to tribal life, has not been met. However convincingly it may be argued on this ground or on that that there has been no real departure from the undertaking of the Ordinance, either in letter or in spirit, it is the native point of view that counts in this connexion. As Sir Robert Hamilton said, if the confidence of the native in the good faith of the Government be shaken, “in the long run we shall lose more than will be repaid by all the gold in Africa”.