Mtanganyika wa kwanza kuhutubia UN

Na Markus Mpangala

WIKIiliyopita tuliona jinsi Kirilo Japhet alivyokwenda UN kuhutubia. Naye MwalimuNyerere alikwenda kuhutubia UN mwaka 1955 na baadaye mwaka 1956, ikiwa ni miakamitatu tangu Kirilo Japhet ahutubie.

Katikakipindi hicho TANU ilikuwa imefungiwa kufanya shughuli za kisiasa na utawala wamkoloni wa Kiingereza. Japhet Kirilo alizaliwa mwaka 1921 na kufariki duniamwaka 1997.

Jinalake kamili ni Kirilo Japhet Ayo. Alizaliwa katika kijiji cha Poli, Nkoaranga ambaposasa ni wilaya ya Arumeru. Baba yake aliitwa Nganayo au maarufu Ngura Ayo,ambaye alikuwa kiongozi wa jadi kijijini hapo na wakulima wa zao la kahawa waMeru.

Kiriloalifariki dunia Mei 30, 1997, na kumwachia mkewe, Ndeleto Kirilo watoto sita wakiume na wanne ni wasichana. Bahati mbaya watoto wawili wa kiume walifarikidunia.

Watotowake wawili wa kiume Zakaria Kirilo na Jefferson Kirilo wanaishi Marekani. AnnaKirilo ni mtoto wake wa kike ambaye anafanya kazi katika Hospitali ya MountMeru.

Katikamaisha yake Kirilo alifanikiwa kupata elimu yake kwa miaka nane na alisomea ualimukatika chuo cha Marangu. Baadaye alifanya kazi serikalini akianzia Mpwapwa, mkoaniDodoma na Arusha.

Wakatialipoteuliwa kuwa mwakilishi wa wakulima waliokuwa kwenye mgogoro mjini Meru,Kirilo alikuwa na miaka 31 tu. Pia alikuwa mashuhuri wakati akiongoza tawi lachama cha TAA akiwa Katibu Mkuu.

Kiriloanaelezwa kuwa shupavu katika ujenzi wa hoja katika vikao mbalimbali vya Barazavya wilaya kuanzia mwaka 1950 na kuwa alama bora kwa wananchi wa Meru.

Babayake Ngura Ayo licha ya kuwa kiongozi wa kijadi, pia alikuwa mweka hazina wakanisa huko Meru. Mzee Ngura Ayo anatajwa kuwa mkulima wa kwanza kununua Trektamwaka 1935 na kuwa mkulima wa kisasa.

Dk.Mesaki anamwelezea Kirilo Japhet kama miongoni mwa wapigania uhuru wasiokuwa nawoga kipindi hicho. Alifanya kila njiakuhakikisha waafrika wenzake wanapata haki zao za msingi.

Hatahivyo kama walivyo viongozi wowote, Kirilo Japhet hakukosa tuhuma kutoka kwawakulima wenzake na wananchi wa Meru.

Marabaada ya kuwasili Meru akitokea Marekani Kirilo Japhet alituhumiwa kutafunafedha za misaada za ushirika. Jambo jingine baya lililowahi kumtokea ni kitendocha kumiliki ekari 60 za ardhi, na kumfanya Kirilo kuwa mkulima wa kiwango borawakati huo.

Hatahivyo ardhi hiyo ilimsababishia matatizo makubwa na kungarimu nafasi yake yauongozi ndani ya chama na ubunge kwa madai alikuwa bepari (mnyonyaji).

“Nilikuwambunge kati ya mwaka 1971 na 1974. Nilituhumiwakuwa na fedha nyingi, na nililazimishwa kuuza mashamba yangu ikiwa ni sharti lakuendelea na ubunge.

“Lakininilikataa sharti hilo kutokana na kiasi na faida za kulima kahawa kwa wakulimawa Meru kilikuwa kikubwa. Hivyo alichagua kuwa mwakilishi wa wakulima wa kahawakatika maeneo mbalimbali Afrika,”

Kiriloalikuwa mstari wa mbele kuendesha harambee ili kupata fedha za kuwasomesha njeya nchi vijana wa Meru. Miongoni mwa walionufaika na harambee hizo ni PeterKishuli Pallangyo, Eliawira Ndossi, Moses Ndosi, Mathias Kaaya, Mike Urio, NdewiraKitomari.

HivyoKirilo alichagua kuishi na wakulima wenzake kuliko sharti la kuuza mashambayake (AMHT3, 1988). Kwa utawala wa kikoloni, Kirilo Japhet alikuwa raia mkorofina mwanasiasa hatari.

LakiniKirilo alikuwa akifanya kazi kubwa ya mapambano ya uhuru na wakati wa shughulizake aliwahi kutembelea maeneo mbalimbali hapa nchini chini ya mwamvuli waTANU.

Kiriloalikuwa mwenyekiti wa kwanza wa TANU katika jimbo la Kaskazini. Kirilo Japhetbaada ya kutoa hotuba yake Umoja wa Mataifa alibaki nchini Marekani kwa mwakanzima akijifunza mambo mbalimbali.

Kiriloalifanikiwa pia kukusanya michango mbalimbali ya kifedha kutoka nje ya nchi nakujenga shule za msingi, sekondari na vyuo vya ufundi kwa wakazi wa Meru. Kirilopia alishiriki kupanda mlima Kilimanjaro akiwa na Jenerali Mirisho Sarakikya.
 
BAOBAO said:
Kwa historia iliyopindishwa na wanasiasa wetu tangu mwanzo kuna mengi Watanzania hatufahamu!

Mtanganyika wa Kwanza kwenda umoja wa mataifa kudai Uhuru wa safu ya mlima Meru na eneo jirani yake aliitwa Mzee Japhet Kililo kutoka jimbo la Mhe.Joshua Nassary kwa sasa.
Click to expand...
Anaitwa Japhet Kirilo kutoka Arumeru mkoani arusha
 

hristopher Nelson ~ Arusha School 1955
Thank you for organizing this site.

I was a student at Arusha School in l955 for the January term. Being the only American at the time, I was called Hank.

My family lived only 12 miles east of Arusha in the heart of Meru country on the old German Lutheran mission estate at Makumira, so I was a day student, often riding my bike home on the tarmac after hockey practise.

My father, Anton Nelson, a Californian, was hired by Meru Cooperative Union, a group of some 4000 African coffee growers. This unusual arrangement came about at the instigation of Kirilo Japhet, one of these Meru farmers. He is mentioned elsewhere on the site in connection with the Meru Lands Case. My father had met Kirilo and his lawyer Earle Seaton at the United Nations in New York City.

Our European neighbors were the two with homes on the rim of Lake Duluti crater, the Fosbrookes and Gladys Rydon, both mentioned elsewhere on this site. Gladys was an Australian coffee estate owner and her home in view of Mt. Meru was ringed with a most beautiful flower garden. I have a photo her pouring tea on the veranda. I remember one tea in which Kirilo was in attendance. Kirilo by that time had become a rising star on the political firmament in Tanganyika. Both these strong personalities were the epitome of gracious interaction.

At Arusha School I remember fellow students Ian Fosbrooke, John Coutividis, Mary Wechsler and her brother Stephan, all mentioned in the l955 school magazine lists.

It would be fun to see a list of teachers, some of whom I've forgotten names. There was 'Lanky' Johnson, Nature Study, Mr. Morgan, algebra, Mr. Jones, French (taught this American to say 'Yes, sir'), a lovely young lady in music class who taught us to sing 'The British Grenadiers'.

I took piano lessons from Mrs. Brewster and played in the end of term recital with Carolyn Pearson.

I was on top of Mt. Meru with Mr. Morgan and the other Arusha School children.

I was in Tanganyika for 7 years, before independence.

After Arusha School I was at American schools for missionary children.

Kirilo Japhet

vitabu unaweza pata hapa
Mtanzania aliyedai Uhuru UN
 

alikuwa mwakilishi wa wakulima wa Meru katika The Meru Land Case. Kipindi hicho Tanganyika ilikuwa Protectorate chini ya waingereza (waliopewa na UN baada ya Ujerumani kushindwa vita). Kwa hiyo wananchi wakiwa na malalamiko yoyote walikuwa wakiweza kutuma mwakilishi na kwenda kulalamika UN. Kirilo Japhet aliambatana na mwanasheria wake. Hii nit tofauti na watu wanafikiri kwamba Nyerere ndio alikuwa mtanganyika wa kwanza kuhutubia UN.
Google Groups
​
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
IMW-32
The Meru
Mr. Richard H. Nolte
Institute of Current World Affairs
366 Madison Avenue
New York 17, New York
Ndurumanga Estate
Usa River, Tanganyika
November 5, 1963
Dear Mr. Nolte:
Political and economic developments in tribal societies
are generally overshadowed by national developments and as a
result receive scant attention. Until recently it has mainly
been anthropologists who have considered the nature of the
African response to European intrusion. Nevertheless it is the
problems which arise as a result of this contact which are at
the heart of developments within Africa today. The extent to
which the new nations can attain their oft-stated goal of be-
coming modern democracies with increasing rates of economic
growth depends on how effectively western political, social,
and economic systems can be adapted to local situations with
maximum development and minimum social dislocation.
Perhaps the most far-reaching legacies of European col-
nialism were the introduction into village life of a cash economy,
and scientific methods in agriculture and animal husbandry. The
response has varied, depending on the nature of the tribe and the
degree of European impact. Clearly, many western innovations
don’t fit African conditions. The introduction of new farming
techniques, for instance, often meet with opposition. To Africans
such methods are not self-evidently good if they challenge cus-
tomary ways of doing things, as aid administrators have often
learned to their despair.
Clearly the unit for study of this process is the tribe.
The Meru of Arusha District in northern Tanganyika (see IMW-)
are interesting in that although fifteen years ago they were
far behind other tribes which had similar influences bearing on
them (i.e., Chagga), they are today skillfully and eagerly deve-
loping their hilly land. Their p_ capita annual income is now
among the highest in Tanganyika.
The reasons for this advance are many and varied. A
number of elements which characterize development in other areas
are found here too: close contact with Europeans and their methods,
a healthy environment which allows, if not encourages, intensive
agriculture, and a ready market for their produce. Other elements
are purely local, such as the repercussions of the Meru Land Case,
* In Swahili the people of Meru are known as WaMeru; one Meru
is an MMeru; their country is UMeru; and their language is
KiMeru. For the sake of simplicity I shall use only Meru except
where necessary for clarity.
IMW-32 -2-
and their cultural affinities to the Chagga and Masai.
The Meru are better known than their small numbe (approxi-
mately 0,000) might suggest. It is the Meru who went to the
United Nations Trusteeship Council in 1952 for help in regaining
a portion of their land which had been alienated to European
settlers over their determined opposition. The British narrowly
avoided an adverse vote, but more important it marked the end of
an era when a colonial power could rule freely, and the beginning
of one when a small, unimportant tribe could make its voice heard
in a matter concerning its own administration. Their near success
at the U.N. suggested the dimensions of nascent African political
power, and it encouraged the subsequent rapid growth of African
nationalism. Indeed, their petitioner at the U.N., Kirilo Japhet,
was one of the founders of TANU.
The Meru, who call themselves VaRwo, inhabit the eastern
portion of Arusha District on the southern and eastern slopes
of Mt. Meru, a spectacular 14,976 foot volcanic cone which would
be considerably more impressive were it not overshadowed by its
giant neighbor, Kilimanjaro, forty miles away. Surrounded by
the Masai and the Arusha on the south and west and by the Chagga
on the east, their’s is an attractive and fertile land. Nearby
is Ngurdoto Crater, a small gem of a national park where visitors,
seated safely on the rim, can observe elephant, rhino, buffalo,
and giraffe far below, as well as black and white colobus monkeys
sporting in the trees above them. Momela Farm, where King Solomon’s
Mines, Hatari, and other movies have been filmed, is now part o
-inationai park.
Among the first Europeans to visit the Meru were Count
Samuel Teleki and his companion and recorder, Lieut. Ludwig von
Hohnel, who together in 1887 carried out explorations in the
area. They felt the Meru were like all mountaineers: active,
brave, and independent. Indeed,
after being duly warned of their
"thievish propensities" Teleki’ s men
were set upon and robbed. Although
their primary objective was to climb
Mt. Meru, the chief’s extortionate
demands for .h.o..ngo (a payment entitling
the donor to pass freely and unmolested
through tribal land), and a spate of
rainy weather combined to defeat them
in this objective.
In a more positive vein, von
Hohnel records that the Meru, who
then numbered about 1,OO0, lived in
a luxurient area and that bananas
formed the chief part of their diet,
although various grains were also
grown. He noted they bred cattle,
Black and White Colobus (Colobus abyssinicus) sheep, and goats, and that their bees
yielded an excel-
lent honey. They
then lived in
scattered huts,
mostly made o
straw and in the
shape o a hayrick.
Culturally,
the Meru are a Bantu
tribe, an oshoot
of the Chagga whom
they resemble both
in language and
culture, although
they have not
developed educa-
tionally, politi-
cally, nor eco-
nomically in the
way the parent
tribe has, nor
have they been
so responsive to
WaMeru
missionary influence. In general they have been a difficult tribe
to administer. Traditionally they share a common origin with the
western Chagga. Legend has it that about 200 years ago two Chagga
brothers split off from their clan. @ne went up to the west side
of Kilimanjaro to what is now Machame, and the other went to Meru
(to Sakila hill), and they were to light fires signalling their
arrival. Sometime later the Meru were conquered by the Masai,
and in coming to terms with them adopted certain of their customs,
notably the age-set system. Many of these customs are now on the
wane through the influence of Christian missions, although this
process is not yet complete.
The tribal area is divided into 14 parish units or mitaa.
The Meru have never lived in villages as we know them, preferring
rather to live in small family units, each with its own plot of
farmland. These are usually lO0 to 200 yards apart even in the
most thickly populated areas. The tribe is composed of more than
25 clans, generally exogamous units meaning that marriages are
usually contracted with members of another clan. In the mitaa
each clan has a leader, a deputy leader, and a number of helpers.
There is also a leader responsible for sacrifices and the spiritual
aspects of clan life. Although anyone with ability can become
a clan leader in a mitaa, members of a clan’s senior branch have
certain advantages.
Parallel with the clans are the age-sets of which there
are five together with the uncircumcized youth. Traditionally
age-sets were of political and military importance. For a long
time, however, their political functions have been increasingly
exercized by a chief, an innovatio borrowed from the Chagga and
IMW-32
strongly encouraged by a
European administration seek-
ing to pin-point authority and
responsibility. At the same
time their military unctions
have become unnecessary, and
so the importance c age-sets
is on the decline.
Ngurdo.tP... cra..te.r
An age-set has one or
two leaders, washili, in each
mitaa, and each Washili has
an assistant. Although the
two older age-sets have only
one leader apiece, the three
younger ones have adjusted to
the influence of the Christian
missions, each having two
washili, one Christian and one
pagan. The washili were impor-
tant in Meru; as representatives
o the people they were tradi-
tionally responsible for the
maintenance o roads, schools,
and irrigation furrows. Although
Christians are in a minority,
they have managed to achieve
equal representation in the
age-sets through this system
o divided leadership. In
practice Christians have an
even more important political
role in the tribe than do pagans.
Finally, there is also a headman umbe, in each of the
mitaa. Chosen by the clan and age-set eaders together, he is the
representative of the local authority and, until recently, of the
Chief, Man_. Although jumbes are usually appointed by the washili,
they rare+/-y come from the ranks o the traditional leaders because
of the danger of conflict between his obligations to the people
and to the government.
According to Henry Fosbrooke, an ex-Government Sociolo-
gist, much of the Meru’s subsequent "political malaises.., derives
in large measure from the coexistence within the tribal polit-
ical structure o two important institutions, a mangi, borrow-
ed rom the Chagga, and age-sets, borrowed rom the Masai".
An observer who knows them intimately has written:
Ordinarily, the WaMeru are divided amongst them-
selves, first as pagan and Christian, and, further,
as East and West (the latter being the cradle of
the tribe and the center of the ruling Clan). Unity
comes only through some overriding, major issue
such as a threat to the security of the land they
occupy. The tribe lacks some of the traditional
courtesy, good manners and, particularly, kind-
ness to strangers usually associated with the
Bantu (perhaps due to the overlay o Masai). They
are a stubborn, suspicious, proud a.nd parochial
people, who, nevertheless, are responsive to firm and
patient handling. Having accepted a new idea the
WaMeru may be relied upon to give it their full
support. They are able and industrious culti-
vators, and make excellent use o the high, ertile
land on the mountain slopes, and are also beginning
to adapt themselves to.quite different conditions
on the plains.
During my stay in Arusha, I will concern mysel with the
origins o economic and political development among the Meru.
To begin with, there follows a somewhat lengthy account o the
Meru Land Case. I have gone into this matter in some detail
not because it is the ons et origo o Meru development (it isn’t),
but rather because it gave a considerable impetus to such devel-
opment, and also because it is a convenient starting point which
can be pinpointed in an otherwise vague and gradual process.
Clearly, however, other actors are o even greater importance.
One would expect
something to happen
at the point when
a progressive mis-
sion had secured
sufficient adherents;
when a proportion of
these had had some
education; when this
has coincided with
the fruits of an
introduced cash crop
(in this case coee)
and when the tribal
leadership had been
exposed to outside
influences. Indeed,
a pertinent question
concerning the Meru
is why things didn’t
happen sooner.
Nevertheless
the Meru Land Case
does present a turn-
ing point. The
gradual evolution of
Lake Duluti
Mount Meru
pre s sure s I eading
to change combined
with the impact of
the Land Case creat-
ed a situation
where tribal life
could no longer
continue as before.
Regardless of the
rights and wrongs
of the case, the
result has bene-
fitted the Meru
tremendously as
Kirilo Japhet later
emphasized: "The
Meru Land Case...
was the key to the
awakening of the
WaMeru to modern
progress. The
besinning was
bitter, but instead of defeating our people, out of it has come
much good."
Very sincerely yours,
fan Michael Wright
The line drawing of a colobus monkey on page three is reproduced
by courtesy of Miss Ruth Yudelowitz.
Received in New York November 29, 1963.
NOT FOR PUBLICATIOI’
INSTITUTE OF CURRENT WORLD AFFAIRS
The Meru Land Case
November 17, 1951--April 22, 1962
lan Michael Wright
THE MERU LAND CASE
It is not easy to convey the intense lifelong passion most
Africans feel fo the land. In subsistence economies land assumes
a very special importance. It serves as a link between the past
and the present, it is the source of authority, and from a material
standpoint it is the sole means of support, poor as it may be, for
the great majority. In contrast to the system of individual rights
we know, the dominant African conception is that of communal owner-
ship where each member of a tribe has a legitimate claim to the
land of the community.
Guy Hunter, in his comprehensive The New Societies of Tro-
pical Africa, has pointed out that for these re’asons",’ "’h"d means
not onl the patch actually under cultivation, but the surrounding
’bush’, which seems unoccupied to the European but is in fact the
reservoir of wild foods, of game, perhaps of fish. It is also a
recreation ground, it often contains the sites of old villages and
the graves of ancestors; it is as much a part of life as the village
clearing and its huts Land and the community are inseparable in
these conditions." He goes on to say, "This psychology of the sub-
sistence economy (combined, too, with malnutrition and debilitating
disease) was at the root of many European judgements on African
mentality---on lack of forethought, lack of effort, lack of persis-
tence, lack of individual ambition, the obstinate refusal to alter
land tenure, the elevation of communal loyalty to a shibboleth
beyond all sense and reason."
The importance of land to the African has made him extremely
sensitive to the attitude of colonial administrations to his own
rights and to the alienation of land to non-Africans and, more than
any other factor, has influenced the relationship between the colon-
ial administration and the people. In Tanganyika less than 1% of
the land has been alienated. Since it has been considerations of
climate and soil which have directed the stream of European settle-
ment, however, this represents some of the best land in the territory.
The Meru have had contacts with Europeans for more than a
century. Because of the attractiveness of their mountain and its
land, a high proportion of their problems in coming to terms with
them have centered about the land and its ownership. At the out-
set the German rgime hoped for a large influx of settlers and
therefore set about encouraging them. An Imperial Decree of 1895
declared all land Crown Land subject to individual and corporate
rights. Areas were to be reserved for Native occupation, and a
local Ordinance required them to reserve for the Natives at least
four times the amount of land under cultivation. Lord Halley
comments that, "The provision contemplated was thus more sys-
tematic than any scheme of colonization organized by the Kenya
Administration, but the precautions for the protection of Native
rights seem to have been neglected in practice."
MT. M|IlU /4l?G FT.
Id | IIU FOIl|IT
1947 APPROX. POS T ON S
1911 OF AI:IUIHA MOSHI
DIITR ICT BOU NDA RY
APPROX BOUNDA
OF ALIENATED LAH)
A$ AT 1959
NGAll
NOlm
MOMIL.A
LEOEHD
NAII| NAIIO|I
K ILIMANJARO
II IMIOI
q:" t ! 4 ! ,LtS
When the Germans first took possession of what is now
Arusha District in the last decade of the 19th century, they
were impressed by its pleasant climate and apparent agricultural
potential. At that time the Arusha and Meru tribes lived in
scattered settlements high on the mountain which afforded some
protection from raids by the few Masai bands which roamed freely
below. Since the District appeared almost entirely empty, it
seemed clear that European settlers could best develop the land,
and so large areas were set aside for their use where farming
would be attractive and, it was hoped, profitable. Very little
delimitation of tribal land was carried out though, and the
alienations dangerously reduced the area available for tribal
cultivation.
The Meru do not seem to hve objected to this. On the
contrary, their chiefs were usually associated with the alien-
ations, often receiving presents for their efforts (which follows
Meru custom). Today the Meru insist that neither the chiefs nor
the people fully realized they were giving land away for the
permanent nd exclusive use of Europeans, since the whole concept
of absolute ownership of land was contrary to tribal custom. At
the same time their numbers were few, and theyhardly anticipated
their lter population increase. Also, on the whole they were
not directly affected by the changes, since the new owners allow-
ed them to graze their cattle and squat freely on the land prob-
ably, among other reasons, to ensure an adequate supply of labor.
Contrary to general expectations, however, there was only
a trickle of missionaries and settlers. Soon after the turn of
the century, a group of Afrikaners known as the Irreconcilables
settled to the north of Mt. Meru. Ironically, they had trekked
overland to Tanganyika after the Boer War, because they refused
to live under English rule in South Africa. Other settlers fol-
lowed, and a few began to realize the alienations were being
carried out without any regard for the future needs of the Meru,
but their warnings went unheeded. A later official report (the
Wilson Report) observed, "An iron ring of alienated land was
clamped around the native lands on the mountain."
Meanwhile, the benefits of security, law and order, edu-
cation, and medical services had led to a rapid population in-
crease, and the German Administration took steps to prevent
further alienation. The First World War intervened and Germany
lost control of Tanganyika. The Mandatory Instrument under which
the British Government took charge in 1920 was noticeably vague
in its references to native land rights and policy. It restrict-
ed itself to prescribing that no rights were to be given to non-
Africans without the previous consent of the Government. The
practice of consulting the Native Authority concerned before
granting such rights to non-Africans was later made mandatory in
950.
Nevertheless, the new administration adopted a cautious
attitude and issoed no new freehold titles, restricting itself
entirely to leaseholds. It felt bound, however, to honor the
rights granted by the Germans. Thus alienated land for the most
part remained alienated regardless of whether it was actually
occupied by European settlers at the outbreak of the War or not.
This distinction is important, because much of the land claimed
by the Meru in 1951 was in fact alienated by the Germans although
never actually settled by either the Germans or the British.
Instead it was used freely for grazing by Europeans and Africans
alike. The latter, since they could see no occupants and were
not attuned to the intricacies of western legalities, considered
it theirs for the taking.
Today, it is said the Africans’ first fears that all was
not well arose at the end of the First World War when the German
farms were sold to British and Greek settlers rather than to
Africans. The Wilson Report noted that, "There would appear
even then to have been no proper appreciation of the future land
needs of the Arusha and Meru tribes and the realienation of the
majority of the farms so thoughtlessly demarcated by the Germans
proceeded without protest. An unparalleled opportunity for re-
adjustment was lost. This was very soon realized, but it was
then too late. The farms had been sold and the ring was once
more in place."
During the redistribution of ex-enemy property in 1920,
eight German farms were retained for the use of the Arusha tribe
but none for the Meru. In 1928, however, a group of Meru banded
together and bought Farm No. 31 (known as Kilimambozi) at Ngare
Nanyuki, which together with Farm No. 328 was later to assume
special importance. In 1931, as a result of the recommendations
made in the Land Development Commission Report, two further farms
were acquired for the Meru, one of which was Farm No. 328 at
Legurukio They were bought by the tribe acting through its
treasury encouraged by the Government which had decided the Meru
should pay for them by a two shilling annual increase in the poll
tax over a twenty-seven year period. This decision was made at
a time of severe financial stringency in Tanganyika, and in fact
they paid the tax for only six years, the remaining payments be-
ing waived.
These various transfers proved little more than a palliative.
Not only did the Meru continue to demand more land, but the Euro-
peans were doing the same, especially the Afrikaners who prefer
(as do the Meru) to divide their land amongst all their sons.
In order to solve the problem once and for all, the Government
initiated a thorough investivation, but this was interrupted by
the Second World War. A situation similar to that after the
First World War then arose when a good proportion o the alien-
ated land was vested in a Custodian of Enemy Property (showing
that many Germans had bought farms in the inter-war years). In
196 the Government took over these properties and announced
they would be disposed of in the best interests of the territory.
Soon after, a one-man Commission of Mr. Justice Mark Wilson was
appointed to formulate a comprehensive plan for the redistribu2
tion of alienated and tribal land on and around Mt. Meru and Kili-
manjaro. His terms of reference included recommendations for ways
Mt. N.eru from Kilima-
njaro
to improve "the homo-
geneity of alienated
and tribal lands".
Wilson’s was a
formidable task indeed.
Over the years pressure
had so built up between
the two groups’ com-
peting claims and
desires that any com-
promise was destined
to founder on the
rocks of pure obstinacy.
This quality was evi-
dent on both sides.
The Meru, increasingly
angry the land had
been alienated in the
first place, wanted
every acre handed over to them. The Europeans, on the other hand,
expected the Government to guarantee the farms they had bought or
leased. With motives somewheme between personal gain and a
desire to see the fullest possible economic development of the
area, they also hoped to obtain the exclusive us of the Sanya
Corridor, a block of land stretching between the two mountains,
for large scale cattle ranching to supply the territory’s and
the world’s growing demand for meat and dairy products. This
would also link the alienated lands of Ngare Nanyuki and Arusha
on the west with those of Ngare Nairobi and Moshi on the east.
Wilson found himself not only between the conflicting
desires of European and African, but the Government itself was in
the process of re-evaluating its land policy and moving away from
its traditional one of tribal land protectionism toward one of
land utilization in the interest of tNe territory’s economic
development. Until the Second World War the Government had fol-
lowed a policy formulated in 1928 by Sir Donald Cameron of
alienating land where it was available. His policy was basically
one of protection of native land rights and interests, but he
felt the higher economic efficiency of the European would be an
object lesson to the African. "If land is available and European
enterprise and capital desire to undertake those processes then,
in my view, it is directly contrary to the interests of the
country as a whole for the Government to refuse to admit that
enterprise and capital and attempt to hold the land under a dead
hand." Concerning the Meru, Cameron said" "The alienation of
which I am most proud is the alienation of some 5,000 acres of
land on the lower slopes of Meru and Kilimanjaro, land which was
not being used by the natives and was denied to the non-natives,
land which will I believe be used profitably by a large number
of enterprising persons for growing maize..." Nevertheless,
officially there was never any question that African interests
were paramount.
At the end of the Second World War, however, this policy
had changed somewhat in emphasis. Although the new Trusteeship
Agreement’s Articles concerning land were similar to those of
the Mandatory Agreement which it superseded, the positive eco-
nomic development of the territory assumed even greater importance.
Article lO .states the Administering Authority should promote "the
political, economic, social and educational advancement of the
inhabitants of Tanganyika". There nevertheless remained a strongly
protective bias. In 1946 the Colonial Secretary informed the
Governor that although further alienations would be acceptable,
he should avoid racial discrimination in the actual allocation
of land, and "I assume also that non-native settlement schemes
would not involve the compulsory movement of the African popu-
lation."
Thus there was a gradual change in policy from the para-
mountcy of native interests to the co-ordination of racial interests;
multi-racialism became the order of the day. Thus economic
development and prosperity, and the combined efforts of all com-
munities appeared to be the accepted standards at the time Judge
Wilson formulated his report. To anticipate a few years, this
policy was voiced officially only in 1950 by a new Governor, Sir
Edward Twining: "The emphasis has...changed from one of who shall
have a particular piece of land to a decision in each case as to
how that piece of land can best be devel.oped in the common interest
of all communities in the Territory." Later, he was to be support-
ed in this pronouncement by the East Africa Royal Commission of
1953-5.
This gradual change in policy coincided with a greater
interest in economic development throughout the world, but it
created special problems in Tanganyika, especially in the
Northern Province around Kilimanjaro and Mt. Neru. Here there
was increased utilization or alienation of land for productive
purposes, and since most of this ls.nd went to non-Africans, it
aroused suspicions and engendered racial animosity. It also led
to conflict between the British Government and the Trusteeship
Council as to which obligation, native land protection or economic
development, was more important.
At the time of Wilson’s investigations, the land situation
was as follows. Lying roughly between the Nduruma River (on the
west) and the Usa River (on the east), Meru country can be said
to fall into several separate zones. The upper slopes, immedi-
ately below the forest, are still largely non-Christian and still
used mainly for annual subsistence crops, coffee and pyrethrum.
A few of the old grass paddocks, where both the Meru and the
Arusha kept their cattle with them on the mountain (probably to
keep them out of the hands of the Masai), are still to be seen
here, although they have almost completely disappeared from the
central area below.
The central mountain zone lies athwart the old Gemman
homse track to Moshi. Representing the Menu heamtland, it is
densely populated with a chain of mainly Lutheman schools and
several minom markets and shopping centers. The numerous rivems
and stmeams raising on the mountain have cmeated geographical
divisions which have become clan divisions and spheres of influence
which ame reflected in the mitaa om parish names as well as by
the pattemn of chumches. Then comes the ring of alienated land,
with a few commidoms through it, below which is expansion land
on the south and east. This land is infommally elated to the
vamious mitaas, so that on the quite different plains land the
old divisions ame maintained.
The pressures leading to the need for expansion land are
several. Mainly, of course, is population growth. From various
sources the following very approximate population figures emerge:
188 i, 000
1922 I I, 000
198 25,000
3o, ooo
1962 O, O00
The 1948 census proved their number to be a good deal larger
than previously estimated and increasing at a rate higher than
the Tanganyika average of 2% a year. Thus the Meru find in-
creasingly less room for expansion on the mountain slopes.
Of considerable importance also, however, is the change
in pattern of living caused by the introduction of cash crops,
especially the introduction of coffee by the missionaries
during the early years of the century. This proved to be the
death knell of the position of cattle on the mountain, and as
a result the first Meru coffee planters were bitterly opposed
by their neighbors. As the area under coffee cultivation grew,
the need also grew of moving the cattle off the mountain. Thus
the creation of settlements to the east and south. In the south
the grazing was near enough for the cattle to move down and back
daily, although it encouraged the wasteful habit of daily trekking
and delayed the inevitable process whereby coffee would displace
the cattle completely (except for stall fed milk cows) and cattle
woud be run on the plains by permanent settlers. As the ring
of alienated land tightened, however, penetration became more
difficult and cattle corridors occupied a great deal of admin-
istrative time. But on the east the situation was different
and more permanent herding camps were necessary.
A third factor causing increased land pressure is the
influx over the years of Africans alien to the tribal area
who have been allowed to settle with little or no control by
the Native Authority. This has taken place especially in the
south but also in the east, and until recently the majority of
the taxpayers in some of the southern parishes have been non-Meru.
Finally, and of most importance emotionally and politically,
is the question of European settlement. Although the Meru were
Ngurdoto Crater
fortunate in having
large alien estates
on their borders
to keep back the
Masai and although
they have never
been short of ex-
pansion land, life
would have been
pleasanter and less
challenging if they
had had the whole
of the mountain
slopes down to
Masailand avail-
able to them.
The Wilson
Report was pub-
lished in 197. While
recommending that no fundamental redistribution of either tribal
or alienated land was feasible, it did consider certain modi-
fications in the pattern of ownership to be desirable. As for
the Meru, their immediate needs could best be met by the re-
version to them of "a moderate number of ex-enemy farms". Since
tribal needs were greater than the total area of alienated land,
however, the real need was expansion into the lower areas away
from the mountain, and it was therefore suggested a planned
development project be set in motion to prepare the plains fr
settlement, namely at Ongadongishu and Chai, the former to be
excised from Masailand and incorporated into Arusha District.
The solution for the Europeans was just what they had
been pressing for all along. The Commission considered it
would be economically unjustifiable to remove them completely
because of their importance to the economy of the territory as
as a whole. Instead it suggested the Sanya Corridor become a
homogeneous European ranching block in which African settlement
and grazing would be excluded. The Veterinary Department
supported this on the grounds it would then become an infection-
free compulsory-dipping zone. The whole of the North Meru
Reserve, largely populated by Meru and considered sub-marginal
and therefore never taken over by settlers, would then be
divided into thirteen large European estates. The Commission’s
underlying assumption was that Africans were incapable of main-
taining European standards in cattle ranching.
The Meru were accordingly being asked to give up the two
farms at Ngare Nanyuki (No. 31) and Leguruki (No. 328), the
latter of which was considered to have limited agricultural
possibilities. They would also have to abandon their previous
practise of grazing their cattle on the rest of the North Meru
Reserve. It was felt the exclusion of the Meru would also
eliminate a potential source of friction by removing an area
where the expanding Meru and Chagga tribes were bound one day
to meet. The land they were to be given in return was said to
be better with considerably more room for expansion. They
would also receive compensation in the form of cash and several
European farms in the central tribal area which would help
decrease congestion there. Nevertheless, the Report questioned
the need for segregation ("Is it necessary or desirable to seg-
regate races, each of which has something to contribute to the
welfare of the other and to the common good?"), and yet it
clearly stated that, "The only solution partaking of the nature
of the finality to the problem of congestion in the mountain
tribal areas is of course to encourage and persuade (and if needs
be to compel) the overcrowded populations to come down from the
mountains and settle permanently in the lower lands in sufficient
numbers to relieve the present excessive pressure on the upper
lands." By accepting the major recommendations of the Report,
the Government showed a willingness to accept a policy designed
to effect geographical segregation, in part at least, of the
peoples of the territory on grounds of race and social difference.
The Wilson Report, although up to then the most thorough
effort to solve the land problem, was out of touch with African
opinion and therefore bound to fail. This is most evident in
his misunderstanding of the idea that the entire North Meru
Reserve belonged to them. From Wilson’s point of view, the
Reserve had been alienated by the Germans and later by the
British, and so the Meru had no claim to it whatsoever. This
led him to believe his solution would be acceptable to them.
For if one leaves out the North Meru Reserve and analyzes what
the Meru would get and lose, they stood to gain both in acreage
and quality of land. The eal losers were the Masai, for the
revision of their boundary with the Meru meant the latter gained
an enormous amount of land, albeit land not suitable for cropping
without irrigation.
On the recommendation of the Northern Province Land Utili-
zation Committee, a body including both European and African
members, a number of modifications and adjustments were made
between 199 and 1951. According to Government sources, the
modified scheme meant this to the Meru: about 330 families
representing 1,O00 persons or 5% of the tibe would have to
move from Farms Nos. 31 and 328 (an adjustment had been made
whereby 150 families would be allowed to remain on a small and
fertile area in the southern part of Farm No. 328), an area of
5,800 acres. In return they would receive ll,O00 acres of aliena-
ted land acquired from Europeans in central Meru, the Ongadongishu-
Chai area to the south, and an area known as Kingori comprising
about 18,0OO acres. In addition the use of important salt pans
(including those on Farm No. 328) and the necessary means of
access to them, were reserved for the tribe.
Furthermore the Government, which steadfastly maintained
that Kingori was better land than the two farms which the Meru
-lO-
then held, proceeded to develop it as a resettlement area. A
pipeline was aid to fifteen domestic and two cattle watering
points, two cattle dips were installed, and a veterinary station
with an African veterinary assistant in charge was set up (to
deal with any sickness arising from the presence of a few tsetse
flies). The Meru to be moved were to be paid compensation
assessed at 14,000, provided with free transport, temporary
huts in the resettlement area, supplies of food for the settling-
in period, and they were to be exempt from taxation for one year.
At the same time a development plan of 46,000 for the entire
Meru area was drawn up. Altogethe the Government was prepared
to commit about 75,000 on the scheme. Again, leaving out the
North Meru Reserve, the scheme was not ungenerous.
The Meru approached the issue differently, however, and
opposition to it was overwhelming. They claimed the land was
theirs traditionally in spite of the Masai origin of its name,
Ngare Nanyuki. Ten years later Kirilo Japhet, the Meru leader
who represented them at the United Nations, spoke of the Meru
attitude:
This land was especially beloved by the Meru
people, because it was here that their first
pioneers had come several hundred years before,
and from Ngare Nanyuki they had spread south-
westwards around the mountain. That area,
especially (farm 31), had been a place of con-
tention more than once. At an early date in the
tribe’s history the Masai bad come and driven off
the WsMeru who were living there, and at a later
date the WaMeru had returned and chased away the
Masai. When in the 1870s the WaArusha had con-
quered the western side of the Meru Chiefdom,
some of the WaMeru had fled to live in Ngare
Nsnyuki with relatives there. With the arrivl
of the Germans much of this land was alienated,
but not all of it was settled by Europeans. On
much of it, called the "North Meru Reserve", the
WaMeru continued to graze their flocks. This
historical connection was also one of the
reasons why the WaMeru opposed te recommenda-
tions of the Wilson Report.
Opposition to the plan grew by leaps and bounds. Already
deeply mistrusting Europeans, their suspicions seemed to be con-
firmed when they learned they were to be evicted to make room
for thirteen European estates. When assured the new land was
better than that which they farmed, their immediate response was:
"If that were true our fathers would long ago have moved there.
If you really think it is better, why don’t you give it to the
settlers and just leave us alone on our inferior land?" They
were convinced the Wilson Report merely served as an apology
for carrying.out the settler-conceived Sanya Corridor ranching
scheme
-ll-
Mt. Meru from Sanya
Chini
Local politics
also became inextri-
cably intertwined
with these more
obvious feelings
against the move.
The then chief, Mangi
Sante, was not ef the
traditional chiefly
clan; rather he had been
elected from two candi-
dates at a public meet-
ing. He was not parti-
cularly popular, and
since the thirties
there had been a
campaign to replace
him by Kishili of the
chiefly clan. Although Kishili was once successful for s short
period, Sante was reinstated as sole Native Authority early in
195. The source of this continuous agitation was a traditional
rivalry between the eastern and western (home of the chiefly clan)
parts of Meru, and as such was not likely to die out with the
temporary ascendence of one faction over the other. Opposition
to Sante continued as before, and in an effort to undermine the
Native Authority a section of the tribe opposed a proposal for
a coffee cess, while at the same time alleging corruption and
initiating a land dispute with the Chief. As his position was
bolstered by the Government, this often took the form of non-
cooperation with the Government itself.
In 198 an attempt was made to revise the Native Authority
constitution on more democratic lines with the assistance of the
Government Sociologist, Henry Fosbrooke, who sought advice from
about fifty Meru, including those in opposition to Mangi Santeo
Unfortunately the new constitution was hurriedly devised, and
although it was apparently accepted by the Chief, the Jumbes
(headmen), and the 500 age-grade leaders of the Meru, it does not
seem to have been put to the people themselves. In essence this
new constitution enlarged the Native Authority to the Chief and
his tribal council, but it never really worked because the sector
in opposition to Sante, while favoring the constitution, refused
to cooperate in making it work until Sante was removed from office.
The Government could hardly accede to such a demand since the
charges against him had not been substantiated. As a result of
continuing opposition, twelve of the leaders of this group were
deported to other parts of the territory following judicial proceed-
ings. Local government in Meru Chiefdom was ineffective, and little
more than an uneasy peace prevailed between the two factions.
On June 7, 199 at a baraza (tribal meeting) the Government
-12-
definitely announced its intention of moving those Menu involved
to Eingori. Although it had formally obtained the consent of
Mangi Sante for the move (esrlier, when he was sole Native
Authority), it had been given unwillingly and under duress, and
his present council was strongly opposed to it, as were the vast
majority of his people. Since Sante was already under fire by
an increasingly powerful segment of the tribe, his acquiescence
only brought the tribe closer together in common opposition not
only to himself but also to the Native Authority and the Govern-
ment. He was blamed for the loss of the land and accused of
having sold it to the Government for his own profit.
Further opposition came from those who stood to lose most
by the evictions, te mainly Christian wealthy cattle-owners of
East Meru who were using Ngare Nanyuki for grazing their excess
cattle, and especially those forward looking ones who had cut
up most of their grazing on the mountain and planted coffee
instead. For them the offer of exchange at Kingori would have
meant an impossibly long food supply line. Those who stood to
gain were those who could use the pro’fered arable land. Indeed
later it was people from West Meru who first defied the ban on
taking up land in the new settlement areas. In effect they
double-crossed the East and carved out huge estates fthemselves.
There was also suspicion of the age-grade leaders who
play an important role in the traditional Meru political system.
Although they said they opposed the resettlement scheme, most
Meru felt they had done little to oppose it. In general it can
be said that although the proposed move had aroused the deepest
feelings of resentment and bitterness among the tribe, the tradi-
tional leaders had not risen to the occasion
​
​
 
BOB OS said:

alikuwa mwakilishi wa wakulima wa Meru katika The Meru Land Case. Kipindi hicho Tanganyika ilikuwa Protectorate chini ya waingereza (waliopewa na UN baada ya Ujerumani kushindwa vita). Kwa hiyo wananchi wakiwa na malalamiko yoyote walikuwa wakiweza kutuma mwakilishi na kwenda kulalamika UN. Kirilo Japhet aliambatana na mwanasheria wake. Hii nit tofauti na watu wanafikiri kwamba Nyerere ndio alikuwa mtanganyika wa kwanza kuhutubia UN.
Google Groups​
Click to expand...
Historia nzuri sana vipi inafundshwa kwenye shule zetu hii historia
 
matundu katika historia ya kupigania uhuru wa ... - Mohamed Said
www.mohammedsaid.com/search?...
26 Des 2013 ... Kirilo kenda UNO na kurudi, TAA ishazungumza na Kamati ya ..... na mwanzo wa harakati za kudai uhuru wa Mtanganyika.

..... wa utawala wa Wajerumani hadi kufika kwa Waingereza.
 
Kuna kitabu kinaitwa 'Mzozo wa ardhi ya WaMeru' kina maelezo kamili ila nilikisoma miaka ya 1970 sijui kitakuwa kinapatikana wapi kwa sasa jamani.
 

Attachments

  • 3-Recapping-the-Meru-land.pdf
    1.3 MB · Views: 84
  • IMW-32.pdf
    3.7 MB · Views: 114
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Back
Top Bottom
Forums
New posts
Post thread
Back