10660. (I- SHARP) fci J-'

he? Yes. Have you any doubt about it? No. Then you go on s "A decision was taken about

the Bantu World but Swart reported that Vundhla want

to boycott us"? Those were the words used there, My 5

Lord. If my notes ay it, they are the words used by the speaker.

Let us read it slowly, I would like you to tell us what it is. "A decision was taken about the V

Bantu World, but Swart reported that Vundhla want to 10 boycott us. They don't say that the people want to boycott and yet there were two thousand people who made this decision". Would you tell the Court what that means? It means what I have written down here.

Will you tell the Court in your own words 15 what it means9 I cannot interpret it, I took down what the speaker said, what ho - what it conveyed I can't tell.

Bo you think anybody could tell=what that meant? I just wrote down what the speaker said, what 20 it convoys I can't tell.

Go on 1 "The Bantu World is represented by an African. It was reported that a committee has been found to defend the Bantu World„ To defend it in what? Is there any leader of the African people who can support 25 the Bantu World? The imperialist dirty paper, ae don't want our leader to speak at the Police station we know that Newclare is a police station". I wantyou to tell the Court what this means? I cannot. I wrote down

/

what the speaker said. 30 And those are his exact words? That is

what he used.

10661. (I. SHAET)

My Lords, I don't wish to hold up the Court unduly long, but there is so much of this that I can't very well ignore it entirely. Would you turn to page 5. Do you know Dr. Njongwe? I do.

Is he a medical doctor? Yes. 5

He is a well educated man? Yes. u oas he speak good English? Yes. Does he speak good Xosa? Yes. Would you ever hear him speaking nonsense? -

No. 10 Did you ever hear him speaking nonsense?

No, it was the first time I met him at that time. Look at the seventh line from the top of

page 5. "If you want to give a hard blow to a person just deprive him of his land. Today I can see that there 15 are still bulls here in Newclare because they want oxen only because oxen cannot gore. These people are no good because they are inclined to change your mind and make you to accept oppression". Does that make sense? Those are the words used by the speaker. 20

Is that your answer in every case? I wrote down what the speaker said.

At the top of page 6 - this is till Dr. Njongwe? BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER :

How does this - how is this going to assist you 25 on the first issue, whether he would be allowed to refresh his memory or not? There are certain portions that he read appearing in the notes, but there are other por-tions which appear to be intelligible, -"-ssuming the Grown says well, we are discarding what appears to be 30 nonsense, we are going to hold onto what makes sense, and we are going to ask the witness to confine his evidence

10662. S H A R p)

only to those portions that make sense. BY MR. FISCEJR s

My Lord, on this I am going to argue that the witness shows himself to "be completely untruthful, that your Lordships can attach no importance to his state-ment that he tried to make an accurate note. Secondly I say, My Lords, that when he records... BY MR. JUSTICE BJKKER s

Is the fact that a withess may "be untruthful, is that a ground for refusing a witness to refresh his memory, or is it something which attaches to the cogency rather than a prohibition to allow this witness to refresh his memory? BY MR. FISCHER :

No, My Lord, because the witness has to say that he endeavoured to record accurately, he made an accurate note of what he heard. Your Lordships will not allow a withess to refresh his memory if he has just been doodling. So that my submission is that when the witness tells the Court that Resha and Njongwe are educated men, he is demonstrating that he takes any sort of note, and consequently it would be... BY MR. JUSTICE B-aKKJR :

Are there passages which are intelligible? How must we deal with those? BY MR. FISCHJR :

Thatthey are just as unreliable, My Lord. That the witness just isn't the person v/ho should be permitted to rely upon his notes, because he is demon-strating - it has been demonstrated in various forms that the notes are unreliable, unlreliable because they are amended and added to and changed, they are unreliable

10663. (I. I. SHARP)

because the witness is an unrealiable recorder. The witness is now telling Your Lordships that - not that he made a mistake, he is telling Your Lordships that this is ah accurate report. I am showing Your Lordships that when the witness says that this is a good recording or an 5

accurate recording, a recording which can be used usefully that is incorrect. But My Lords, if Your Lordships think that I should not pursue the line, I am... BY MR. JUSTICE BARKER :

No, what is exercising my mind is this, it 10

may be on this line of cross-examination that the Crown will say, very well, now we have got to go through all the notes and every bit of it, in re-examination if the objection is attaching to leave to refresh his memory. Then we will have to listen to all the evidence, and all 1 5

the notus, and then the Crown may say, well, now we ask for leave for the witness to refresh his memory, and if granted wo start de novo. Then comes the second attack on the question of the man's... BY MR. FISCHER s 20

My Lords, I know that this might overlap, but I was intending to cross-examine once only, and not - even if the witness is permitted.. BY MR. JUSTICE BiDEKER :

I am just raising this really... 25 BY MR. FISCHjJR !

I realise the point which Your Lordship makes, and it is obviously valid that my 1 .arned friend would be entitled to go through every bit of it. BY MR. JUSTICE B2EKER : 30

Only on the first leg, whether or not he is to be allowed to refresh his memory. Assuming there is an

10664. (I. SHARP)

adverse ruling to the Defence, then we start de novo, and all this has now got to be read in as evidence. BY MR. FISCHER :

Yes, My Lord, I must concede that. On the other hand, it did appear a mLid submission to make to 5 Your Lordships. That when this witness comes along... BY MR. JUSTICE BELKER s

Yes, general unreliability.. BY MR. FISCHER s

...And he doesn't say to Your Lordships well, 10 here I got stuck, I couldn't catch up. But he comes here and he says this is an accurate recording, it leads one to the submission, My Lord, that nothing can be accurate. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER s

If I may just take you back to G. 292, the 1 5

document to which you have already referred. Are there any passages you can trace where a word has been inserted or a word has been delete! which changes the meaning of the - of what was said? Not substituting an equivalent or a better word, according to th- witness,. Is there 20 anything here appearing by way of deletion or insertion of words which changes the context of the whole thing or gives it a different meaning? BY MR. FISCHER s

Yes there is, My Lord, I haven't been able to 25 devote the time to these notes that I should have, but there is for instance the very illustration which has been mentioned already on page 3, where the word "already" is substituted for "their". Now there was something else there, My Lord. There, My Lord, the 30 witness couldn't have mistaken a sentence containing "already" for a sentence containing "their", neither by sound nor by meaning.

^ees. (I. SHARP)

BY MR. JUSTICE BEKK.jR : What I would "be very interested in is in if

one could find-if it is so, of course if it is not so, it is not so, if there are deletions or substitutions which change the meaning of a sentence altogether, then that I 5

think woule elucidate it. BY MR. FISCHER s

If I might just point out, My Lord, the very passage I am referring to now, he talks of the colonial powers, and there was a sentence which went on with the 10

word "their". That sentence was first of all changed -the first word was first of all changed to "which" in a smudged black ink, and then "which are" was written above. But certainly the sentence the witness et out to write was not the sentence "which are already", it was 15 some different sentence, a missing word, and then the word "their". BY MR. JUSTICE BjKKER :

Well, there you have got his testimony that he said - you heard what he said. But if you can find 20 something where, having regard to what he said how the amendments came about, if you can find something whicji completely changes the meaning of a sentence which had a meaning, unamended, then speaking for myself I think that could be of assistance. 25 BY MR. FISCHER s

My Lord, it is very difficult to decipher these things in order to establish.., BY MR. JUSTICE B ..PIKER s

I appreciate your difficulty, Mr. Fischer, 30 but you see, I don't know what field is being opened by this other line of cross-examination.

10666. (I. SHARP)

BY MR. FISCHER s I realise My Lord, that it is not a conclusive

argument. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKKER s

It may be better to deal piecemeal with these 5

documents as they come in, as they are put in, and then you might at the end strike out all the evidence which -I don't know, it is merely a question for you to consider... BY MR. FISCHER :

Perhaps I should, My Lord, just complete one 10 or two further references to G. 14, and leave that then as an illustration and go on to a different point. BYMR. TRENGOVE :

On G. 14 we have been following the original notes of the witness, the original notes marked G. 14, 15 and My Lords, there are certain cases where my learned friend has read out words in the transcript which in the Crown's view are not contained in the original notes. Could my learned friend rather refer the witness to the

s original notes to point out what he says are passages 20 which don't make sense. In one or two cases, My Lords, as far as we have checked from his original notes, the passage in the original notes does make sense. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF :

Can't you just get up and say when Mr. Fischer 25 quotes a sentence, and he quotes it to the witness, and he leaves out a word according to his copy, that the original has the word, and just get up and say that in the original the word is there. BY MR. TRENGOVE : 30

My Lord, I don't want to interfere with the reading of the original notes, My Lord. "A Committee found.."

10667. (I. SHARP)

for instance, the notes clearly show that it is "A commit-tee formed..." - that is just an example. BY MR. JUSTICH BE'KKER s

Have you come across any instances where by virtue of a deletion or insertion the complete meaning of 5

the sentence is changed? BY MR. TRiJNGOVS s

My Lords, I can't say that I have, but I wouldn't like Your Lordships to rely on that, because I haven't dirested my mind to that. No, I haven't My Lord. 10

BY MR. FISCHER s My Lord, I will just finish this one report.

Sharp, would you have a look at the outside of that transcript, just before we go on. Just look at the head-ing of the transcript. Isn't this one of the transcripts 1 5

which you checked at Police Headquarters? No. Not? I dcn't remember, I don't think that

is the one I checked. I don't mean the actual copy, but isn't this

a copy of a document which you checked? It may be the 20 copy.

Perhaps you could find out during the adjourn-ment. I just want you to look at page 6 at the top. This is Dr. Njongwe speaking. You report him as follows s "The Bible tells me that the Devil was an important person 25 in Heaven. It is said that he must look after the people, while doing so he was making use of property not his, like the bafa begiya were doing, misleading the people in the organisation. Yet they were stealing the people. The one who say that we must buy unity and then put it in our 30

pockets, I cannot work with him." Is that what he said? That is what he said, My Lord.

10668. (I. SHAEP)

And lastly you recorded Tambo, who is a practising attorney of this Court, isn't he? Yes.

Also a man who speaks sense? You have often listened to him, haven't you? Yes.

On many occasions? Yes. Have you ever heard him talking nonsense? I

am just thinking generally of the meetings you have attended where you have heard him speak. Have you ever heard him talk nonsense? Not actually where I did not write - I can't remember what he said.

If you had heard an educated man like an attorney, like Tambo, speak absolute nonsense, would you remember it or would you not rememberit? Itndepends on the time, how long ago.

How would it depend on the time? It may be perhaps five years ago, I cannot remember today.

And if he said it two or three years ago? It is the same, I wouldn't be able to remember what he said, unless I have written down what he said.

If the man was talking absolute gibberish, would you remember that Tambo had spoken gibberish on an occasion? My Lord, unless I have taken an interest in what he said, I may perhaps remember it.

Alright, just have a look at page 7. You see the last five lines of his speech ; "This is going to show where we are going to. To slavery or freedom. So the cowards to Meadowlands. So the people of Western Area do not make the nation to mourn because of your cowardness. It was once said to a soldier when he goes to war that he must not bring shame on us". Can you fit any meaning to that? Those are the words he used, My Lord.

10669. (I. SHARP)

Do you know J. B. Marks? I do. Does he generally speak sense? I wouldn't

remember. Don't you remember whether he speaks sense or

not? Come now. Aren't you saying in the witness box just 5

whatever you like to say? It is very difficult for me to say, unless I have recorded what he said, to remember what he said years back.

Surely you can remember whether he is a man who talks nonsense or whether he talks sense? My Lord, &0 I have heard people, educated people at a meeting talking things which make me not to understand why a man speaks like that, when he has got emotions there.

Alright Sharp. Is he an educated man? He is educated. 1 5

Just look at G. 294 and G. 295 which are -G. 294 are your notes ofna meeting held on the 7th February, 1954. This was a Let the People Speak Committee meeting at Newclare about which you have testified already. I want you to turn to page 10. Do you see the second line, 20 "Swart cannot deny that because is a historical fact that the future belongs to a nommon man. Swart Donges Verwoerd know what they are doing, but the common plattclander does not know, he only accepts what is given to him. Those whom the gods want to destroy, first make you mad." 25 Is that what Marks would havesaid? "Those whom the gods want to destroy first make you mad"? That is what he said.

Do you know what the correct quotation is? You don't know that you have turned it upside down? 30

That is what he said. Could you not have made a mistake in what you

10670. (I. SHARP)

wrote down? No. I take it J. B. Marks would have spoken in

English? He often speaks English, but sometimes he used an African language at times.

Can you tell what he used there? I cannot 5

tell. That is very interesting. Are you sure your

can't tell? I can't remember, unless I have noted it down.

You know, that is my very next point to ask 10 you about. Can't you tell whether J. B. Marks spoke English or not? I can't find an indication that he spoke in English. Some speakers speak in English and then they change the African words.

You see, you remember saying at the Preparatory 15 that the moment you looked at a note, you could toll what language the speaker used? Things were so fresh at the Preparatory examination.

Did you say that at the Preparatory Examina-tion? I may have said it, I may not, I don't remember. 20

Do you remember whether at the time of the Preparatory you could still say by a glance at your notes what language every speaker spoke? I think I could.

Perhaps I had better remind you of it. You see, this is what you said, without there being anything 25 in your notes to that effect, "as soon as I read my notes I remember what language was used by a particular person". "Although your notes are in English?" "Correct". "And although there is nothing in your note to say what language has been used?" "Correct". So there was no 30 doubt about it, was there? Right.

At a glance at your notes you could tell what

10671. (I. SHARP)

language the speaker spoke? Yes. •"•nd it is also clear that you never recorded in

your notes what language the speaker did speak? Yes. How was it that you could tell what language

the speaker spoke "by looking at your notes? Certain 5

speakers speak certain languages, and certain speakers another language.

And certain speakers speak more than one language? Yes, sometimes a speaker begins with another language, and then in the middle they use another language. 10

And so how were you able to tell what language speakers spoke by a glance at your notes? Because I know J. B. Marks, that J. B. Marks often speaks in English.

Isn't it true Sharp, that you just have a 1 5

guess at it, you know this man sometimes uses one language and sometimes another, and you know that some other speaker generally speaks Xosa or Zulu and you just guess? I am not guessing.

How many meetings did you go to every week? 20 I can't remember, maybe two or three meetings a week.

And at this stage do.s a glance at your hotes not help you to say what language a spoke? It is because it is some time back now. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMPFF ; 2 5

Could the witness just go outside for a while, I want to ask Mr. Trengove a few questions. (WITNESS LEAVES COURTROOM). Mr. Trengove, this witness may not deliberately be dishonest at all, but he is one of the most careless witnesses I have come across. He 30

says whatever comes into his head. There are other features, apart from this - this is shared by my colleagues - that he is a dangerous witness, as far as that is

r V . /

1067L. (I. SHARP)

concerned, he doesn't think, he says just what he thinks at the moment. Apart from the amendments which have to a certain extent been explained, this particular matter worries us considerably. At the moment we think it would be dangerous to allow a man of this calibre to refresh his memory on notes made so long ago which have been ltered on a number of occasions - this attitude also effects the taking down of the notes and the translation. BY MR. JUSTICE BEKK.JR s

He makes a selection of what is important and what is not important. BY MR. TRENGOVE s

My Lord, the Crown appreciates the remarks made by Your Lordship at this stage, and the Crown will reconsider the position of this witness. BY MR. JUSTICE RUMIFF ;

Well, we have indicated to you our feelings, at the moment. The more he gives evidence, the more the impression is strengthened in our minds thathe is a dangerous witness. COURT ADJOURNS. CASE REMANDED TO THE 9TH MARCH, I960.

\

I. 'r& 10673 .

COURT RESUMES ON THE 9TH MARCH, I960. APPEARANCES AS BEFORE.

BY MR. TRENGOVE s My Lords, the Crown has considered the posi-

tion of Sharp's notes in respect of meetings and speeches

made at meetings, and the Crown is not proceeding with his evidence on that aspect. There is just one further masting in respect of the attendances, My Lord. BY MR. JUSTICE BSKKSR :

Mr. Trengove, the meetings on which Sharp gave evidence as to what was said, is that to be struck out from the record? BY MR. TRENGOVE ;

Yes, My Lord. BY MR. JUSTICE KENNEDY s

Should it be struck out, or is the Crown going to say it is not going to rely on it? BY MR. TRENGOVE s

My Lords, as far as the Crown is concerned, the Crown is not relying on it at all. BY MR. FISCHER s

My Lord, there is just one further matter. The witness Solomon I think his name is, asked this morning if he could be released early. I shall not want him for further cross-examination, My Lord. We have been unable to find exhibit C of that record. We hope to get it from the attorney in Tort Elizabeth, but unfortunately he is cut of Port Elizabeth. Now we will still search for it, My Lord, and if it is found we will make some arrangement with the Crown. The only thing I do wish to make plain, My Lord, is that the Defence attitudewill be

10674.

that there never was - whatever the witness Ndimba may have said in his own Defence, there never was such an oath as he spoke about or is said to have spoken about.

ISAAC SHAKE, under former oath? EXAMINATION BY MR. TRENGOVE CONTINUED :

Sergeant Sharp, I hand to you a document marked G. 951, a document containing a list of names, is that correct? Correct, My Lord.

Now you see at the top of each page is put a certain date? Yes.

Some pages are marked 25.6.55 and other pages are marked 26.6.55? Yes.

Now to what do those notes refer? They refer to the Congress of the People which was held at Kliptown, Johannesburg, My Lord.

And the names you have put on that list? What (

are they? They are names of people who attended the Conference on these dates.

"here were you when you made those notes? I was at the entrance of the enclosure, My lord.

At the entrance to the enclosure to the...? To the place where the Congress was held.

And the people that you put on that list, where were they going? They entered the enclosure, My Lord.

Now I first want you to refer to the notes where you have the date 25.6.55 at the top of your notes. Does that refer to the first day of the Congress of the People? Correct, My Lords.

I don't want you to give all the names of people on that list. I want you - I want to refer you to

10675. (I. SHARP)

certain numbers, and I want you to tell the Court the names you find there. The first is No. 6? Leon Levy My Lord.

No. 10? C. Sibande. No. 13? S. Tyiki. No, 17? R. Resha. No. 27? S. Lollan. No. 31? L. Masina. No. 34? Peter Selepe. No. 40? Helen Joseph. No. 59? Dr. W. Z. Conco. No. 66? Philemon Mathole. No. 72? Faried Adams. No. 74? Joseph Molife. No. 79? P. Nene. No. 93? J. Nkadimeng. No, 117? I. Molaoa. No. 128? W. 3. Gwendu. No. 108? Michael Motsele. Nov/ I want you to turn now to the portion of

your notes bearing the date at the top 26.6.55* Does that refer to people who attended the Conference on the 26th June, 1955? Correct.

Were you at the enclosure again? I was. These people whose names you have taken down

where did they go? They entered the enclosure, My Lord.

The first name on your list? L. Levy. No. 5? P. Madiba. No. 10? L. Masina. No. 19? Hymie Barsel. No. 20? H. Joseph.

10676. (I. SHARP)

What Joseph is that? Helen Joseph. No. 44? E.I . Moretsele. No. 45? "P 1 • Selepe. No. 46? J. Molife. No. 51? P. None. No. 55? S. Tyiki. No. 61? F. Adams. No. 65? John Nkadimeng. No. 68? i. a Molaoa. No. 74? M. Moolla. No. 83? P. Mathole. No. 87? S. Tyiki. No. 93? R. Resha. Then from 107 you have notes of certain

people, and in brackets behind - if you take 107 for instance, - take 113» have you got that? Yes.

You made a note behind that name? No, after 114 I made a note.

What is that? "Cape Town". And 116, did you make a note behind that?

No. I am sorry, My Lord, my numbers don't

coincide. Now during the evidence that you gave of people that attended, you mentioned a number of names of people that correspond with the names of Accused whom you have identified last week? Correct.

Now where the names are the same as the people you have identified...? The names are the same as the people I have already identified.

Does it refer to the people you have previously identified with those names? That is correct, My Lord.

Now you mentioned a name of a Dr. Conco

10677. (I. SHAEP)

attending this Conference. Do you know this man? I do, My Lord.

Would you "be able to identify him if you see him? Yes, My Lord, I have already identified him.

Not according to my note. Would you do so again? Yes.

And you also mentioned the name of Selepe. Would you identify him too if you see him in Court? Yes, My Lord. (WITNESS IDENTIFIES ACCUSED NO. 30 AS DE. CONCO? ACCUSED NO. 18 AS PETEE SELEPE^.

Now during the course of your evidence regarding people that attended the meetings, you mentioned on one or more than one occasion the following names, and I want you to tell Their Lordships if you can remember, whether or not any of the following people were accused at the Preparatory Examination in this case. Dr. H. Moosa?

He was an Accused at the P.E. My Lord. D. Tloome? No, My Lord. L. Nkosi? He was an Accused. Euth First? She was. Is this person Euth First known by any other

name? Mrs. Slovo. D. C. Thompson? He was an Accused. A. Hutchinson? He was an Accused. F. Mddiba? He was an Accused. L. Bernstein? He was an Accused. M. Motsele? No, he was not an Accused. Not as far as you know. J. Slovo? He was

an Accused. A.E. Iatel? He was an Accused. D. Moiloa? — He was not an Accused. J. Madzunya? He was not an Accused. W. Gwendu? He was an Accused.

10678. (I. SHARP)

S. Masimola? He was an Accused. J. Matlou? He was an Accused. 0. Tambo? He was an Accused. P. Joseph? He was an Accused. H. G. Makgothi? He was an Accused. A. Chamile? He was an Accused. 0. Motsabi? He was an Accused. M. W. Sh pe? He was an Accused. I.Q. Vundhla? He was not an Accused. S. Malupe? He was an Accused. M. B. Yengwa? He was an Accused. B. Seitchiro? He was an Accused. 1. Mtwana? ghe was an Accused. P. Beyleveld? He was an Accused. R.3. Tress? Yes. A. Mahlangu? Yes. B. Hlapane? Yes. R. Tunzi? Yes. C. Sibande? Yes. B. Mashaba? Yes. M. Rantha? Yes. N. Sejake? Yes. P. Nthithe? Yes. Virginia Ngomo? No. H. Ba£sel? Yes. T. Mmusi? Yes. S. Shall? Yes. L. Morrison? Yes. P. Keitsing? Yes. Y. Barenblatt? — Yes. H. Tshabalala? , Yes. Y. Putini(?)? No.

10679. (I. SHARP)

These names you have just mentioned, where you referred to the same name more than onco in your

evidence, does it refer to the same person? Yes, My Lord.

iified to people being present, you attended a large number of other meetings of various organisations, is that correct? That is correct.

AnI during the course of those meetings, did you see certain people regularly attending meetings at the 10 • same meeting of the same organisation? Correct.

Now I want to confine my evidence - my questions to the Accused. I first want to ask you about A. M. Kathrada. How long have you known him - take the period of the Indictment, from October, 1952 to November, 1956 - 15 can you say in respect of the iiccused whether or not they were active on the Rand during that period. A.M. Kathrada?

Yes, My Lord. Since when have you know him? I have known

K thrada since 1950, My Lord. 20 In what organisation was he particularly

active? The Transvaal Indian Congress. Rosha? I have known him since - I think

I know him from 1946.

In addition to the meetings to which you tes- 5

On the Rand?, Ye Q O 0 25 In his personal capacity, is that correct?

That is correct. During the period of the Indictment, 1952

to 19 56, was he active on the Rand during that period? Yes, My Lord, 30

-ii-nd in what organisation? The African National Congress, My Lord.

r 1

10680. (I. SHARr)

L. Masina? How long have you know him to "be on the Rand? I have known him I think about the same time as I have known Resha, since about 1946.

And during the period of the Indictment, do you know whether he was active politically? He was, My Lord.

In what organisation pa ticularly? The African National Congress, My Lord.

Mandela? N.R. Mindela? I have known him too.

Yes. Throughout the period of the Indictment?

Was he active - actively engaged in politics on the Rand during that period? My Lord, not actuallyl He did not attend meetings for a oertain period, My Lord, 15

when the ban was in operation. Now J. Nkadimeng? I h ve known him too. Since about what period? My Lord, I think

it is about 1953-SO

And during that time was he active in any particular organisation? He was active in the African National Congress.

And Helen Joseph? I know her too. That is Accused No. 2? Yes. Sinceabout what period? My Lord, I think 2 5

it is about 1955 or 1956, somewhere there. In what organisation was she active according

to your knowledge? She is active in the Federation of South African Women.

J. Molife? I also know him, My Lord. 30 For what period of time approximately?

Also, 1954, 1955, 1956, My Lord.

10681. (I. SHARP)

Was he - did he take an active part in politics in the rand? Yes.

In what organisation? African National Congress, My Lord.

P.P.D. Nokwe? I haveknown him sihce 1952, 5

during the Defiance Campaign. During that perio , did he take an active part

in politics? Yes, My Lord. In what organisation? The African National

Congress. 10 W. Sisulu, since when have you know him?

I have known Sisulu since about - something in the 'forties. Has he been on the Rand all the time? Yes. As far as his political activities are con-

cerned, in what organisation was he active? The African 1 5

National Congress, My Lord. L. Ngoyi? I have known her since 1954,

1955, 1956. During that time, in what organisation was she

active? In the African National Congress and the Federa-20 tion of South African Women.

S. Tyiki? I have known him too. From what period? Also between 1954, 1955,

1956. In what particular capacity have you know him 25 •

as far as politics are concerned? I have known Tyiki as the Chairman of the African National Congress, Sophia-town Branch

And P. Nene? I know him since 1953, 1954, 1955. Also on the Rand? On the Rand. 30 Taking part in politics there? Yes. In what capacity do you know him? I have

known him to be chairman of the A.N.C. Alexandra Township

10682. (I. SHAEP)

Branch. F. Adams? I have known him to belong to

the Transvaal Indian Congress. How long have you known him? Also between

1952, 1953, 1954. 5 During that period was he active on the Rand?

Yes. 3.P. Moretsele? I have known Moretsele

since about 1937, My Lord. Airing the - has he been on the Eand all the io

time? All the time. During the period of the Indictment, in what

organisation was he active? In the Alrican National Congress.

G. Sibande? I have known him 1954, 1955, 15 1956.

And during that period where and in what organi-sation was he active? In the African National Congress.

Did you know him in any particular capacity? He used to be referred to as the leaderof the A.N.C. 20

in Bethal district. P. Mathole? I know him too. During what period? Also between 1954, 1955,

1956. During that period was he active in any 25

organisation? Active in the African National Congress, My Lord.

Do you know of your own knowledge whether he had any particular capacity in that organisation?^— He is a former Secretary of the Transvaal African National 30

Jongress, My Lord. Moosa Moolla? I know him too.

10683• (I. SHARP)

Since when? 1952, 1953-In what organisation was he active? In the

Transvaal Indian Congress Youth League. Dr. Conco, since when have you known him?

My Lord, I h ve known Dr. Conco from 1953, when I went 5 down to Durban.

Luring that period - nevermind. I. Molaoa? I know him.

How long have you known him? - - I have known him during the period 1954, 1955, 1956. 10

Where was he - in what organisation did he actively take part in politics? The African National Congress.

Was that on the Rand? Yes. L. Levy? I know him too. 15 Since when? Between 1953, 1954, 1955, 1956. During that period, did he take part in

politics on the Rand? Correct, My Lord. Do you know of any organisation that he was

connected with? My Lord he was connected with the 20 South African Congress of Trade- Unions.

And S. Lollan? I know him too. How long have you known him? I have

known him between 19 53, 1954, 1955. During that period was he on the Rand? 25

Yes. And clid he take an active part in politics?

That is correct. In what organisation particularly? The

South African Coloured People's Organisation. 30

And P, Selepe? Selepe first came to my Communist ?

knowledge when he attended a Conference Party in

10684. (I. SHARI)

in Alexandra Township. When was that? It was in 1950. Since that day has he been active on the Rand

in politics? He has, My Lord. In what organisation? In the African 5

National Congress, My Lord. D. Tloome that you referred to, you said he

was not q.n Accused at the Ireparatory Examination, what Tloome is that? Dan Tloome.

Was he a member of any organisation that you 10

knew of? He was a member of the Transvaal Non-European Trade Union Council.

Do you know of any other person by that name who took an active part in politics on the Rand? No.

H. Watts? Do you know this person H. Watts? 1 5

I do. Do you know this person by any other name?

Mrs. Bernstein. Do you know of any other person by that name

who took an active part in politics on the rand? No. 20 You mentioned the name of D. Moiloa, who is

that? David Moiloa. In what organisation was he taking part in

politics? The African National Congress. Where? In Newclare. 25 Do you know of any other person by that name

who has taken part in politics there? No, My Lord. And J. Madzunya? I know him, My Lord. Who is he? He is Josias Madzunya. In what organisation was he? When I first 30

came to know him he was in the A.N.C. Do you know of any other Madzunya who was active

10685. (I. SHARP)

in the A.N.C.? No. This Vundhla that you referred to, what

Vundhla is that? Philip Vundhla. You referred t. a Mashamaite? Yes. This A. Maliba (?) what is his name?

Alpheus Mallba (?). In what organisation was he active? My

Lord, he was active in the Communist Party before tie Suppression of Communism Act came into operation.

After that? Then he took part in the African National Congress.

You knew him as aiBmber of the African National Congress? Yes.

Do you know Y. Cachalia? I do. In what organisation is he active? Transvaal

Indian Congress, My Lord. Do you know laul Joseph? I do, My Lord. During the period of the Indictment, do you

know where he stayed? He stayed at 74 Avenue Road, Fordsburg.

Was that his residence? Yes. NC FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR. TRENGOVE.

CROSS-EXAMINED BY ME. FISCHER ? Sharp, I want you to describe just briefly

the process you followed at meetings at for instance the Trades Hall and the Duncan Hall when you took down these lists of at endances. I want you to describe to the Court where you were when you made up these lists of attendan-ces at the Trades Hall? It is very difficult for me to tell without my notes, but usually I stand outside, My Lord.

1 0 6 8 6• (I. SHARP)

And that is why your notes frequently con-tain a remark - a name, "arrived in such and such a car"? And then you give the number of the car, or you say, "arrived with so-and-so in such and such a car". Correct?

Correct. And then you take up your position - I am

just sort of summarising what you said at the Preparatory, opposite the hall on the other side of the street? Correct.

Did you do that also with a hall such as the Dunaan Hall? — r Correct.

And one of the halls at Orlando, I think? I haven't given evidence about a meeting at Orlando.

What was the other hall you gave evidence

about? It may be the Isaacson Hall, White City, Jabavu.

Yes, that is right. Did you follow the same procedure there? The same procedure.

And then you described to the Court at the preparatory Examination that when there was a person in the vicinity who you thought shouldn't be there, even if he didn't go into the building, you would put down his name ? Ye s.

An.1 then in your report the next day you would remember which people went into the building and which people were just seen in the vicinity? I think My Lord I make a note opposite the name of the person concerned.

What note? That he was outside. Then you went on to say - no, this is the

way you put it. You w^re asked, "Sometimes you say in a motor car like that", and you said "yes", and then you

10687. (I. SHARP)

H P said but sometimes you just write down the name, and your answjr was, "But I remember the names of the persons who didn't enter the hall", and then'When you make up your report," you were asked, "can you still remember whether they entered or whether they did not enter", and you said 5

''I can remember the pessons who entered the hall and the persons who did not enter". So you did rely on your memory sometimes? Correct, sir.

Now in these buildings, in the Trades Hall, for instance, you know that there are four halls and a 10 number of offices, and the Duncan Hall of course is part of the City Hall, correct? Correct.

Now your evidence about that appears at page 5514 of Volume 28, when you wore asked about this Trades Hall, and you agreed that the entrance was in Kerk Street 15

and that you knew there were four halls there, and offices. Then you went on - you were asked this. "The significance of the notes you kept is that you have seen persons going through the entrance into the building known as the Trades Hall", and your answer is "Correct". "Once they 20 have passed the entrance from your situation you cannot say where they go?" and your answer was, "Well, not all of them. But I do go up often and look in the hall, and these people I see them inside the hall". Then you were asked, 'Do you sometimes go into the meetings", and 25 you said "Yes". "But you quite frequently of course do not go into the meeting", and your answer was "Correct". "And you don't indicate in your notes whether you made a note whilst you were in the street or whether you made a note whilst you wore peeping in the hall or inside 31a the hall". Your answer was "Correct." So Sharp, there is nothing on your note which can tell you whether the

10688. (I. SHARP)

name on your list was the name of a person who merely entered the "building or whether it was the name of a person whom you saw inside the hall? I wouldn't say without my notes.

There is nothing on your note that will tell 5

you that? Correct? It may be correct, sir. I go up to the hall...

Sharp, don't let us waste a lost of time. Is there anything on anyone of your notes which says that I saw such and such a person inside the hall? There 10 is nothing to say that I saw such a person inside a hall.

So it is quite clear that if you look at your notes today, you can't say whether that person was one who merely entered the building or whether it was one wh m you actually saw in the hall? Unless my notes indicate 1 5

it, I won't be able to say. I am putting it to you because I don't want to

waste time going through your notes, that there is nothing on your notes to indicate one way or another? I think I read notes here where I told that Kathrada was outside 20 and Paul Joseph was outside.

Yes, that is a person who has just been in the vicinity, who didn't go in at all? Yes, outside.

Thatis what you said at the Treparatory too, that you wouldn't be able to tell now. You see, I want to 25 suggest to you that occasionally you make mistakes apart from that. You sometimes - you concede that you may have marked people present who wore not present? I don't think so.

You remember your evidence about people who 30 arrived and who may leave immediately? Do you remember what you said? I don't remember what I said, My Lord.

}

10689. (I. SHAET)

Do you remember you said something about it? You see, this is what you said % "I say that if a person enters the building and I put nis name down in my list, perhaps only a few minutes he comes back again. I leave that person in ray list as I originally entered him on my 5

list". You were asked, "You don't scratch him out?" anl you replied "No"? That is correct.

You see, because you have testified in some x- of these meetings to banned people being present at U 1

meetings, and they were people who may have come there, 10o but left early? I don't remember.

Now I want to ask you whether you ever make any alterations in your attendances? Without the notes, I am not in a position...

Do you ever remember making alterations? 15 No.

Do you remember that in giving evidence here you gave evidence about a meeting of the 23rd May, 1955 -1954. This was a Conference at the Trades Hall, G. 755. Your notesbook contained thirty-six names, it is your 20 notebook G. 1156 at page 90. Do you remember that? I think I remember.

And your report contains thirty-seven names? Without the hames I won't be able to tell.

Did you ever put name-: in your report that 25 you had not got in your notes? It is possible, I wouldn't deny that.

S you may have added names afterwards? Yes.

From memory I take it? It is very diffi- 30

cult for me to answer the question... Is it possible? It is possible, sir. I want to put you two specific cases. Do you

r

1 0 6 9 0• (I. SHARP)

remember you dealt with a meeting of the 25th July, 1954, and that was the meeting which was attended hy a number of members of the South African Police, and an interdict was obtained against their attendance. Do you remember that? I do. 5

And you testified here from a programme, an agenda in which you said the meeting had been carried out in terms of the agenda? Correct.

One of the people who was down as a speaker on that agenda was the Accused Nokwe? I don't remember 10 unless I can see my notes.

Well, this is G. 843? Yes, that is correct. Do you know that he was banned by that date?

I drn't know. And was not able to attend the meeting or 1 5

speak? I don't know. Would you accept that it is possible that he

didn't speak? No, he wasn't banned. He was only banned recently.

Alright Sharp, you testified from your note 20 G. 750 that Mrs. Helen Joseph was at a meeting of the 15th November, 1953. Do you concede that you might be wrong about that? I don't think so.

You see, Mrs. Helen Joseph was in Cape Town on that day, she on the previous day attended a meeting 25 of the Executive of the National War Memorial, so she could not have been at a meeting in Johannesburg on the 15th November? I don't believe that.

Might you have made a mistake? I don't believe that I made a mistake, 30

You couldn't have hade a mistake? No, I wouldn't write a person whom I have not seen there.

1

(I. SHARP) 10691.

It is impossible? — It is impossible. May i just remind you of something, Sharp, in

connection with this meeting where you say Nokwe spoke on the 2 5th July - do you remember that - in the Affidavit it wq.s alleged that one of the reasons why the police attended that meeting was that theybexpected that Nokwe might speak, he being a banned person. Haveyou forgotten that? — My Lord, I wouldn't put a person that he was a speaker if he was not a speaker.

So it is impossible again? There are just two matters I want to touch on with regard to what you have said about various persons. What did you say about Selepe? With what organisation was Peter Selepe associated? I said that I saw him at the Communist I arty at Alexandra Township.

That is before 1950? In 1950. And I take it you also saw himat the Congress

meetings at the same time? Correct. And the samel would apply to Madiba? Yes. He was also a member of the Communist Party

before 1950 - a,member of the African National Congress That is correct.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

RE-EXAMINED BY MR. TRENGOVE s The meeting of the 15th November, 1953, which

- at which it is alleged that you saw Mrs. Joseph. Sharp, I haven't got your exhibit here, G. 750, but is that the meeting of the Youth Festival at the Trades Hall? Yes.

Do you remember what other members of the Police Force attended that meeting with you or can't you remember? I can't remember. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR. TRENGOVE.

r

10692. lr

R0CC0 BE VILLIERS, duly sworn; CROSS-.XAMINED BY MR. FISCHER s

Major, I notice from the statement that was served on us that the - that you didn't give the objeat of your being present or near the beerhall on the day of the riot at Newelare? I was present at the beerhall.

The object however, you set out in the statement 5

that was filed on us, and that was to screen the frequen-ters of the beerhall? That is so, My Lord.

So apparently there must have been quite a large number of the members of the police? If I remem-ber correctly there were over two hundred. 10

Around the beerhall? Yes, we formed a cordon round the beerhall.

This of course would have been visible to anybody outside the beerhall? Everybody would have known what was going on. Major, it is a fact, isn't it, that 1 5

you sernior officers often find yourselves in an unenviable position in administering laws which are not popular, isn't that so? I do not follow your question.

Well, take a thing like the liquor laws. One knows, I assume, that many of the senior officers are 20 against the kind of liquor law which has to be enforced against non-Europeans? I am not in a position to give an opinion on the desirability of the liquor laws or otherwise. My job is and my duty is to administer the law. 25

Yes, but is it not correct, Major, that in carrying out those laws the police force incurs a great deal of unpopularity amongst non-Europeans? That is a matter of opinion.

Well, what is your opinion? I am not 30

10693 . (R. DE VILLIERS)

prepared to give an opinion. Alright. Now, where were you actually

standing when the rioting started inside the beerhall? I was first on the Western side of the beerhall and

I walked aroun.1 to the Eastern side of the beerhall. 5

And were you with your men whom you say in your statement were about sixty yards from the beerhall?

That is so. There was a cordon of men and they were placed at intervals round about the place.

And the rioting started when you were still on 10 the Western side - or did it start when you got to the Eastern side?m I think I was on my way towards the Eastern side when they started rioting inside the beer-hall.

Was that aft er this first shot was fired or 1 5

before? The first shot was fired whilst I was going round, if I remember correctly.

So you were walking along the line of your men? That is so.

When a shot came from the direction of the 20 beerhall? You heard a shot? Yes.

Did you ever find out who fired that shot? Wo,

And you could only say that it was from in-side the beerhall because it came from that direction? 25 That is so, My Lord.

It is quite conceivable of course that many people believed that the shot came not from inside the beerhall, but from outside the beerhall? There was also a shot fired from the Western Native Township Area. 30

At the same time? No, some time after-wards.

L

10694. (E. DE VILLIERS)

No, I am talking about this particular shot,

the first shot? I had ascertained that the shot was fired inside the beerhall.

Yes, that is what you ascertained later on? Yes. 5

But I think you told me five minutes ago that you didn't ever find out - you said you didh't find out who fired the shot? That is correct.

So someone subsequently told you it was from inside the beerhall? Yes. 10

If you hadn't been told that, I take it you wouldn't have been certain whether it was inside or outside?

No, of course not. So that many people may very well have believed

that it was from outside the beerhall? They could 15 believe anything.

They could believe that, not anything? I know from enquiries instituted that that shot was fired inside the beerhall.

But people starling there might have come to 20 the conclusion that that shot prssibly was fired not inside but outside the hall? That could be so.

And therefore the possibility is not excluded by any means that many people may have thought that the first shot came from a policeman? That may be so. 25 NO FURTHEE QUJSTIONS BY ME. FISCEiR.

DOUGLAS NDABA, under former oath; CROSS-EXAMINED BY MR. PLEWMAN 1

You will remember that my learned ffiend Mr. Berrange put some questions to you. I just want to deal with some of the n>tes on which you have given evidence.

10695. (D. NDABA)

The first is Exhibit G. 662, which relates to a meeting on the 24th January, 1954. Prom this meeting you read an extract which you said was the speech of one Nokwe. I just want to go to the commencement of the meeting. The chairman was one Isaac Makoe, and I ask the Crown to make 5 your note available to you so that you can follow me? I have it before me.

I just want to put it to you that the chair-man in his opening remarks and towards the bottom of the page of the transcript said ; "We don't want apartheid, 10 we want freedom. We are not fighting the white people because we don't want to stay with. We want to stay in Parktown together, we want to vote in Parliament", and then if you go over the page, there is a speaker Kumalo, who again says % "The government has sent his police here 1 5

because he wants a full report about what we said at this meeting. What we want to say together with the white people in this country". And the same people lower down s "The African people will march forward to freedom without bloodshed." You can accept that those were statements 20 male? Yes.

The speech of Nokwe which was dealt with in evidence in chief, can you say what language he spoke?

Yes, I can. What language was it? English. 25 And can you just tell me this, how good or

how bad is your English? Is it completely fluent? I can speak it.

Are you fluent in English? Do you speak English very well? As far as I am concerned, it is so 30 that I feel that I am quite comfortable in English.

Will you have a look at G. 170, which relates

10696. (d. NDABA)

to a meeting of the 19th June, 1955, dealt with by you in your evidence in chief. I have your original notes here. Look at the first speaker, who according to you is Kumalo, the chairman. This was not dealt with in evidence in chief. You find the last two sentences ; "These Europeans 5 are used as tools and they are pleased to see you coming forward". And the "tools" you spelt "tuls"? Yes.

The next sentence is ;r,re are not fighting for any colour but for everybody"? Correct,

The next one I wish to deal with is Exhibit 10 G. 187 which relates to a meeting on the 14th of August, 1955. You will remember that from this meeting you referred to the speech of one Tshabalala, you referred to a portion of the speech of somebody said to be David Magoba (?) and you referred to the concluding remarks 15 said to be those of Tyiki. If you look right at the end you will see "Tsotsies must break the houses of Europeans because they are rich"? Yes.

Will you look at the beginning of the meeting and you will see that the first speaker was one Simon 20 Tyiki? Yes.

You will see that the meeting opened with a prayer? Yes.

Tyiki then, speaking in Xosa, the first sen-tence ; "We are prepared to talk although there are not 25 many here. Jesus said like each other we want to teach the Africans"? Yes.

And further down you will find the following extract % "We must not hate Dutch, we must teach them to stay in peace with us" Have you got that? "I ask you 30 to come to this square and pray"? Yes.

And his last sentence is, "In future there will

CD. ndaba)

be nc».u — I can summarise it this way - In future there will be no tsotsies and that perhaps links up with the statement you read in in chief. There will be no tsotsies in future. Will you refer to the speech of Magoba (?). I'll give you the sentence which you r.ad in chief, and J 5

want to read just a sentence above that. You started by reading "We must show that we are six million and the whites are only two million." I just want to put that in its context by reading the sentence before it ; "The government has sent summonses to Africans who did not go 10 to Meadowlands. The case is handled by the A.N.C. The City Council agree with the government to remove Africans at lady Selborne, Pretoria." And it is really that, that in this portion of the speech the speaker was talking about. You go on immediately, "We must show that we are 1 5

six million..."? Correct? Yes, I have it. Can wo go to exhibit G. 177. Those are your

notes of a meeting of the 28th August, 1955. Now to shor-ten things, can I put it to you that the theme of this meeting was that people must have unity. I'll just read 20 some octracts. "If the 8,000,000 can come together and say to the G. " - presumably Government - ".. stop, the Govern-ment would soon stop". That is the speech of one Bokala. And lower down in the same speech hebsays "Come together in one spirit and tell the G. we want freedom". And you 25 will find Tyiki - a portion that you read in : "I appeal to you to join the A.N.C., even the Detectives must join". And towards the end, "Africans we must come together. Even the Dutch can come to us2. So can I summarise it by saying that the theme of this meeting was that people 30

must have unity? Yes. That is what you read out there. You read into the record - gave evidence about

10698. N M B A >

a speech of one Tshabalala, it is on page 3 of the transcript, and the opening sentence that you gave in evidence was, "The rule of a white man in Africa is coning to the end.." and then you went on with a further extract. I would like to just deal with the earlier portions of Tshabalala's speech. Ab nit a third of the way d~>wh in his spe ch, you will find a sentence s "The A.N.C. say we must live in peace in this country". And then there is a piece about the Plying Squads which I think I can fairly say doesn't make sense. If you follow it down you will find another sentence ? "If they are friendly with Africans..." - referring to the whites -"... why can't they give freedom to African people. We want even the Bantu lolice to got freedom." And follow that down, and he then refers to the Dutch people and the removals, and he says % "I say whites are also oppressed. And then follows the portion which you read in in chief? Yes, thatis correct.

Now you also gave evidence in relation to this meeting about the speech of one Resha. I just want to reaffirm - you did say to my learned friend Mr. Berrange, did you not, that you might in y.iur notes have left out a great deal of what was said, and what you missed may well have been important? All I can say in

reply to that, My Lord, is that what I got down I got down, and what I did not get down I havj no knowledge of at all, I couldn't tell you what matter it was.

That I appreciate. All I want to know is whether I have the correct version of what you said to my learned friend, that was that you left out a great deal of what was said, you didn't get down everything that was said? Yes.

10699. (D. DBABA)

Now this speech which you gave of Sesha's, you inay remember referred to pangas in Kenya. You can accept that that is so. I only want t put this ques-tion to you, you will concede will you not, that it is possible that other things were sail at this point in the 5 speech which would explain the meaning and which you might not have been able to get down? It is possible, is it not? Y-s, I didn't hear anything else he said, except what I wrote down here.

It is possible that he sai:! things which you 10 didn't get down at this particular point in the speech?

I cannot remember. Yru cannot deny that. Now you also gave

evidence in relation to the names of certain persons who attenled certain meetings, and that evidence was given 1 5

from your not^s G. 851? B and C, I think it is. G.490b and G. 910a. Where were you - was your practise always the same in taking names of people you saw attending meetings? Di 1 you have the same practice all through?

On the So thin, s I have no names of people that I 20 wrote down to indicate that they were there.

I will deal with them individually. The first one is G.851, it deals with a meeting cn the8th October, 1955. You say it was a meeting of the African National Congress. Wher~ wer~ you or were you inside 25 the hall? I have one set of notes now before me of 8.10.55.

Were you inside the hall or outside the hall? Outside.

Was it the same on the following day? 30 The some applies to that, I was outside.

An-! you merely gave a list of names of people

10700. (D. NDABA)

you saw arriving at that particular place? Yes. I saw these people entering the hall where the Conference was held.

At all events it is quite clear from ycur notes, because you give motor car numbers, yriu never went 5 into the hall to confirm whether they stayed there or what happened? I never entered the hall.

And the same go for the other two exhibits in relation to which you gave evidence about people attending meetings? You stayed outside the hall? Tf you have 10 other notes which I made similar to these, that indicate that 1 took names of people from outside, then the same will apply to that, I will not have gone inside to see whether they were there.

If y ur notes inlicate that you took the 15 motor car numbjs can we shorten it by saying- that your procedure must have been the same as the meeting you have just dealt with? Not necessarily, because if I were allowed to be inside and I had been inside, I may

20

also have taken numbers of motor cars outside, after having gone out again. NO FURTH-iiR QUESTIONS BY ME. PLOWMAN.

KS- 'XAMIN-j;]) BY ME. TR _.NGf Vu i 25

At Orlando the Conference was being held on the 8th-10th - on the 8th October, 1955, an:- you have your notes in fr-nt of you. This hall is it in a - is it a hall standing by itself or is it in a buililing?

The hall is part of a building which has other rooms. But you can see a person go into the hall.

In that building, are there any other halls in the building? Th^ro is one big one and then there

Collection: 1956 Treason Trial Collection number: AD1812

PUBLISHER: Publisher:- Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand Location:- Johannesburg ©2011

LEGAL NOTICES:

Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.

People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.