Crown and Charter: The Early Years of the British South Africa Company by John S. Galbraith (review)

REVIEWS 341 in integrity,for they excludedpsychical phenomena.Secondly,they wronglyassumedthat science wasaltogetherrationaland empirical.Finally,they were inadequatefor the resolution of moraland ethicalissues. Christianity,variouslyattacked , wasalso unacceptable tothisgroup,whosought tofindgroundsfor morality andethics in somemiddleground. Sidgwick, professor of moralphilosophy atCambridge,foundnoethicalcriteriain nature,somaintainedhisbeliefsin deityandimmortality,seeking anempiricalbasis for thesein psychical research. Wallace,a pioneerin evolutionary biology,felt that onceman'smentaldevelopment had reacheda certainpoint,naturalselection was inoperative on man'sbody,andheaccordingly concerned himselfwithphrenology, mesmerism, andspiritualism toprovideascientific explanationforthedevelopment and progressof human nature. Turner exhibitssomeperipheral confusionin scientificmatters,for examplein advertingto the relation of sexualto natural selection, but hisprincipleargumentiswelldocumented andconvincing. Again,in examiningMyer'squestfor thegroundsof dutythroughseminalinvestigations of the subliminalself, Turner's statementthat this questwas'neither religiousnor scientific but morenearly... romantic'greatlycircumscribes bothreligionand science .Hisargument,however,isbroadlysound. Romanesaccomplished impressivescientificwork, and was led by his use of scientific methodtounhappyskepticism, whencehefledto agnosticism. Turner has someusefuldistinctions in his analysis of the latter term. Butler'spolemicwith Darwiniswellknown.Convinced of thelatter'sfraudulence,but alsoconvinced by evolutionary argumentthattherewasnopersonalGod,hetookrefugein a'comfortable nihilism.' Finally, Ward used philosophyto destroy the pretensionsof naturalism,and usedinsteadthe conceptof an activemind with three irreducible functions. Turner hasgivensixintriguingportraitswhichemphasize a generallyneglected concernwith the non-rational.His bibliographic essayprovidesa usefulaid to further exploration TREVOR H. LEVERE University ofToronto CrownandCharter:TheEarly Years of theBritishSouth AfricaCompany. JOHNS. GALBRaITH .Berkeley,Universityof California Press,•974. PP. xi, 354, maps,illus. $•2.75. This excellentand scholarlybook providesus with a definitive accountof the chartering of theBritishSouthAfricaCompany, itsoccupation ofZambesia, andthe consequences of'imperialismbycompany'1889-95.With exemplarythoroughness ProfessorGalbraithcoversagainthe alreadywell-troddenhistoricalground of Europeanexpansion intosouth-central andcentralAfrica,aswellasthecontroversialmatterof the role playedbyCecilJohnRhodesin thoseevents,to producethe best account now available of the scramble for the lands of the Ndebele. His task was noteased bytheexistence ofaconsiderable bodyofwritings - albeit ofhighlyuneven 342 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW quality- onthecentralAfricanPartition,andwhichmighthaverobbedhisnarrative offreshness. Butsorigorous, balanced, andsharply analytical ishisscholarship thatI felt I wasreadinga pioneeraccount of a storyI hadabsorbed somanytimesbefore. Professor Galbraithisthemaster ofdetail,sequence, andcharacter; theresultofsuch carefulenquiryistocorrect andaddsingle points ofsignificance alongthewayofhis narrative, tochange abalance ofinterpretation here,toalteraperspective there.The cumulative effectissimplya veryimpressive andoriginalanalyticnarrative.There are no greatsinglesurprises arisingout of hisexhaustive researches intoboththe European andAfricanarchives involved, butstudents ofthescramble willbequickto perceive hisnewcontribution to'Rhodesian' scholarship. Forexample,it shows here howby skilfuluseof well-known and untappedsources (notably,in thiscase,the MaundPapers) atacritical momentin thedevelopment ofthecharterpolicy, when the Rhodesand Gifford groupswerein a positionto blockeachother,it wasthe ColonialOfficein Londonwhicheased thewaytoamalgamation andtheissuing of a charterto a combinedsyndicate (see79-86). An apparentlysmallpoint,it actually tellsusmuchaboutthe Britishimperial authoritiesand the charterpolicy,about Rhodes'so-called all powerfulrole,andabouttheseedieragents of Westernexpansionat the ground-level of the partitionwhobattledto acquireand exploitthe concessions from Lobengula. The bookisin factrichin suchcarefulexposition andrevelations. Patientenquiry, ratherthanarushof idict,hasalsomeantthatwegetaveryfull andprecise account of thefinancialdimensions of the story,bothwithrespect to thecapitalizing of the concessions - wherethe mostquestionable free-wheeling practices by the Rhodes grouparesetoutstarklyin incontrovertible documentation - andwithregardtothe Ds^Companyitself.At lastwehavesomething approaching a balance sheetof the Rhodesian enterprises. The bookeschews moralizing aboutcapitalist imperialism, but it concludes powerfullywith a distinctlyHobsonian value-judgment: 'By their abdication of responsibility, the boardand the government became accessories to Rhodes.Between•889 and •896 the charteredcompany wasan enginewithouta governor'(339). A goodportionof thebookisnaturallygivenovertoaconsideration ofRhodes, his politicalambitions andmachinations. Professor Galbraithbuildsa highlyeffective portrait of the publicman by showinghim in action- pitilessin determination, ruthlessin motion, and possessed of almostdemonicenergy.He stresses, however, that Rhodesworkedin an economic and politicalenvironmenthighlyfavourableto hiscauses, andin a timepropitiousstillfor theadventurer-imperialist. Rhodesthus emerges asa far from 'greatman,'in theconventional moralsense of theword,and ratherasavastly powerfulhumanmatrixofforces reflecting theagents andagencies of belligerent Westernexpansion operatinginthecolonial peripheryof empire. The personal andprivateRhodes depictedhereI foundtheleastconvincing part of the wholebook.Professor Galbraithhaspreviously declaredhisbelief in the importance of 'ego-satisfaction' asa fundamentalforcein Rhodes' publicactions. This may be true, but it strikesme that sucha notion removesother socialpsychological factorsfrom the portrait.If onehasto giveprimacy to anysingle over-ridingelementit isperhaps justaslikelythatRhodes wasmoved bythespiritof 'Britannicnationalism' in anageof nationalisms. REVIEWS 343 A lastthought,bywayof a pedagogical aside. Thisbookisessentially aboutthe BritishSouthAfricaCompany; andwhileProfessor Galbraithistoowellreadnotto haveinvestigated allthemajorpublications covering theroleoftheAfricanactors in the Partition,he doesnotcarrythatdimension of thestoryanyfurther.The very excellence of hisscholarship thusleads metowonderwhetherfuturehistorians of theScramble for Africawillwishtogiveanylargerplacetotheindigenous political communities in the historyof thesecrucialdecades for the continent.'We were boundto die;wecouldbutchoose themannerof our going,'thechiefsmightwell havesaidwith the Austrianstatesman of •9•8. Yet, arguably,the very mannerof 'theirgoing' hadconsiderable significance in shaping thesequence ofthepartition.I alsowonderwhensomebody willfollowup RichardBrown'spioneerarticles, and writeusa definitivelocal historyof thefoundingof Rhodesia. These were not, of course, ProfessorGalbraith's tasksand it would...