Aspects of Colonial Tanzania History

4. Chief Makongoro of Ikizu: Beneficiary and Victim of Indirect Rule

4 Chief Makongoro of Ikizu: Beneficiary and Victim of Indirect Rule Introduction Questions about the nature of British colonial administration in sub-Saharan Africa continue to be raised by historians.163 Recently focus has been on how Indirect Rule functioned and whether or not it was effective or even indirect.164 Until recently the historical origins of this policy were traced to Sir Frederick (later Lord) Lugard’s administration of Northern Nigeria.165 However, this has been questioned by Mahmood Mamdani who has argued that the lessons of Indirect Rule were first learnt in South Africa and then applied to the rest of Africa.166 What made Indirect Rule attractive was the administrative expediency of coopting traditional rulers into the colonial bureaucracy. However, what dictated its adoption was “the failure of the assimilationist or direct administration policy, 163 Ranger, T. and O. Vaughan (eds.) Legitimacy and the Twentieth-Century Africa: Essays in honor of A.H.M. Kirk-Greene (The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1993). 164 Chipungu, S.N. (ed.) Guardians in Their Time: Experiences of Zambians under colonial rule (Macmillan, 1992). 165 It was Sir George Goldie who suggested to Frederick (later Lord) Lugard the need to use traditional rulers as surrogates of the Royal Niger Company. Later, Lugard applied the idea in the administration of Northern Nigeria. 166 Mamdani, M. Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of late Colonialism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996). 44 ASPECTS OF COLONIAL TANZANIA HISTORY which was in vogue in the nineteenth century”.167 In any case, the British could not have governed people who did not understand English and had no tradition of English law without engaging in the expensive educational operation of training thousands of local administrators to govern in that language and with that law. The cornerstone of Indirect Rule was the Native Authority whose promulgation differed from colony to colony. In colonial Tanzania, Native Authorities came into existence upon the enactment of the Native Authority (establishment) Ordinance of 1926. The ordinance empowered the Governor to appoint persons to be Native Authorities or members thereof. For the appointment of chiefs three principles applied: personal ability, hereditary or traditional right and custom, and the will of the people.168 These principles reflect the hegemonic objectives of the policy of Indirect Rule. By capitalizing on the existing respect for traditional authority, the colonial Government could protect itself against anti-colonial agitators and “against the disruptive behavior which would be a consequence of the breakdown of the old habits and traditions”.169 The Native Authority Ordinance of 1926, which repealed that of 1923, stipulated the duties and powers of Native Authorities (Sections 4, 8, 9 and 15); the manner by which they could cease to be recognized as native authorities (Section 3, iv), and the penalties to which they were liable (Section 14). Chiefs became salaried functionaries of the colonial administration. This however did not make them mere puppets of the colonial administration170 or “ndiyo” (yes) men as some historians have suggested.171 Some chiefs, such as Mohammed Makongoro Matutu of Ikizu, Musoma District, performed “official” duties and reinvented traditional authority for personal benefits. Chiefs had quite some leeway to do as they pleased because of limited supervision by their British overlords. Furthermore, because the Native Authority Ordinance(1926)saidnothingabouttheraisingofrevenuebytheNativeAuthority, and nothing at all about the expenditure of such funds, chief Makongoro, as we shall see, were able to demand contributions, in cash and in kind, which enabled them to accumulate considerable personal fortunes. Such wealth was used for conspicuous consumption and to finance “development” projects which endeared them to colonial authorities. Chief Makongoro as a beneficiary of Indirect Rule Ikizu was a small chiefdom, about 300 square miles, located astride the main Musoma-Mwanza road some 35 miles south of Musoma, the district headquarters. Makongoro was appointed chief in February, 1926. He was the eldest son of Matutu Mwesa Gibwege, who was the tenth in the chronology of 167 Bretts, R.F. “Methods and Institutions of European Domination,” revised by M. Asiwaju, UNESCO General History of Africa, vol. 7, Africa Under Colonial Domination edited by A. Adu Boahen: 316. 168 Pels, P. “The Pidginization of Luguru Politics: Administrative Ethnography and the Paradoxes of Indirect Rule,” American Ethnologist, vol. 23, no. 4 (November, 1996): 742. 169 Liebnow, J. Gus, “Chieftainship and Local Government in Tanganyika,” PhD dissertation, Northwestern University, 1955: 142. 170 See John Iliffe, “The Age of Improvement and Differentiation,” in I.N. Kimambo and A.J. Temu (eds.) A...