PORT NATAL HARBOUR AND THE COLONIAL POLITICS OF NATAL 1894-1897 L.J. Twyman Department of History, University of South Africa, P.O. Box 392, Pretoria, 0001 Port Natal-hawe en die Natalse plaaslike politiek. 1894-1897 Gesien in die jig van die groat somme geld wat op hawe-ontwikkeling in Natal gedurende die negentiende eeu bestee is, is dit te verwagte dat Port Natal-hawe 'n belangrike strydvraag in die plaaslike politiek geword het, veral oak as gevolg van die rol van die politikus Harry Escombe. Escombe was voorsitter van die Haweraad sedert die instelling van hierdie liggaam in 1881. Dit het horn in 'n unieke posisie in Natal geplaas, vera I omdat die koloniste di~ raad as 'n medium beskou het om hulle onafhanklikheid van 8ritse en selfs Natalse regeringsbeheer te toon. Teen 1894 het die lede van die haweraad en die publiek Escombe egter nie meer heelhartig ondersteun nie. Dit was as gevolg van Escombe se botsing met die hawe-ingenieur, Cathcart Methven. Hierdie persoonlikheidsbotsings en opponerende gesigspunte met betrekking tot ingenieursbeginsels (skuurkrag en die verlenging van die noordpier, teenoor baggerwerk en die verlenging van die suidpier) het daartoe gelei dat die hawe 'n definitiewe rol in die politiek gespeel het. Die koloniale gemeenskap was in twee definitiewe kampe verdeel. Escombe se persoonlike en politieke posisie is ten nouste geraak en die hawekwessie het ongetwyfeld 'n rol gespeel in die val van die Escombe-ministerie in 1897. Seen against the background of the enormous sums which were spent on harbour development in Natal in die nineteenth century, it is hardly surprising that Port Natal harbour became an important issue in local politics, especially also as a result of the role of the politician Harry Escombe. Escombe had been chairman of the Harbour Board since its inception in 1881 and this placed him in a unique position in Natal as the Board was seen by colonists as a medium by which they could show their independence from the control of Britain and even the Natal government. By 1894, however, the members of the Harbour Board and the public were no longer completely behind Escombe, mainly as a result of his clashes with the harbour engineer, Cathcart Methven. These personality clashes and opposing viewpoints with regard to engineering principles (scour and a lengthening of the norh pier, versus dredging and a lengthening of the south pier) led to the harbour playing a definite role in politics. Colonial society was divided into two definite camps. Escombe's personal position and his political standing was closely affected and the harbour issue unquestionably played a role in the fall of the Escombe ministry in 1897. Introduction Although Port Natal harbour had some influence on the politics of Natal during the 1850s, 1860s, and 1880s, it was only in the 1890s, and especially as a result of the role of Harry Escombe, that the harbour became a prominent issue in the politics of Natal. This was in spite of the fact that construction of the outer works came to a halt in 1894. Harry Escombe, "that excellent citizen, liberal minded, public spirited gentleman" as the The Natal Mercantile Advertiser described him,' became chairman of the Harbour Board in 1881 and in this capacity gained almost unfettered power over the affairs of the harbour. He held the reins for fourteen years and personally influenced nearly all decisions on the development of the harbour. Escombe's chairmanship of the Harbour Board placed him in a unique position in Natal, which he did not want to 30-7-1880. Historia36(2), November 1991 5 relinquish after the Board was dissolved in 1894, even though he was no longer the Minister responsible for Harbour Affairs. While Edward Innes was harbour engineer from 1881 to 1888, the hold which Escombe had on harbour affairs was not questioned. After the appointment of Cathcart Methven in that position in 1889, personality clashes and opposing viewpoints with regard to engineering principles led to the harbour playing a greater role in politics. Colonial society was divided into two definite camps. Escombe's personal position and his political standing was closely effected and the harbour issue unquestionably played a role in the fall of the Escombe ministry in 1897. The dissolution of the Harbour Board and Methven's fate Although Escombe resigned as chairman of the Harbour Board at the beginning of 1894 and he was not appointed Minister of Public Works in the first cabinet of John Robinson, but Attorney-General, it did not mean that he had lost interest in the harbour. On the contrary, he declared in May 1894 that "my life, as far as I am concerned, is pledged to the opening of the Harbour to vessels of the deepest draught, at all times of the tide, by night as well as by day. Whether I am a Minister or not a Minister, whether I am in office or out of office, whether I am on a Board or off a Board, that is the work which I have set myself inside of constitutional rights and powers",2 As Escombe was also involved so intimately with politics, the harbour would of necessity playa role in this area as well. After Escombe's resignation from the Harbour Board, it was clear to most observers that the further existence of the Board, which had for so many years directed the works at the harbour, was threatened. On 10 April 1894 a bill "To provide for the better regulation of the Ports and Harbours of Natal" was laid on the table, According to this Bill, all the officials of the Harbour Board would become civil servants and all the duties which the Harbour Board had fulfilled according to Act 29 of 1880 would be managed by the Governor and Governor-in-Council and the government would set up rules and regulations for the general administration of the harbour. The reaction of the press foreshadowed the attitude of the two most important newspapers in the ensuing years. The Nata! Mercury hailed the Bill and declared that matters concerning the harbour would be handled more efficiently since the minister could report directly to parliament.3 The Nata! Witness, on the other hand, was opposed to the Bill and indicated that the division between Escombe and Methven, which had become evident in previous years, was the real reason behind it.4 The division outside parliament was also reflected within it. John Robinson must have been aware that the Bill could be contentious because he asserted that if the government took responsibility for the harbour "there will be much less risk hereafter of those wranglings and contentions that have existed in the past... things will go on much more smoothly as regards the control of Harbour affairs than perhaps they have done in the last year or two." Others supporting this view were of the opinion that the Harbour Board had obtained wide powers "by a 'fluke' and oversight of the Governor"s, which was in many ways quite true. The debate indicated that the government had some strong opponents, although it was not yet possible to identify an organised opposition. These members were perturbed that the Harbour Board, which had provided such excellent service in the past in controlling one of the most important public works, now had to disappear. It was surmised that Escombe played a role in the decision as it was common knowledge that he could after 1891 no longer control the body as he had done in the past. It was also suspected that the government, under the prodding of Escombe, had planned the move "to slaughter the Engineer; and to uphold Escombe's ideas on the harbour." J.P. Symons also remarked "I am sorry we have 2.3.4.Legislative Assembly Debates, 25 April -11 July 1894, Vol. XII, 16-5-1894. 11-4-1894. 21-4-1894. 5. Legislative Assembly Debates, 25 April -11 July 1894, Vol. XXII, 16-5-1894, 6 no Opposition ...it is time there was some criticism".6 In spite of opposition the Bill was accepted and Act 3 of 1894 dissolved the Harbour Board. The Board, which had been in existence for fourteen years, had been a unique institution in many ways, and had always relied heavily on public support to maintain its position in spite of opposition from the government and even the Secretary of State. It often executed works which had been accepted neither by the government nor by professional advisers. Now, however, the instigator of the Board no longer saw a function for a quasi-independent organ in a colony which had been granted responsible government. In many ways, it was clear to most that Escombe, in spite of his high sounding statements, had already decided to dissolve the Harbour Board, which by the nineties no longer supported him completely. The differences of opinion that existed between Escombe and some sections of the Board, spilled over into the press and the public at large. In May 1894 F.S. Tatham, a member of the Legislative Assembly, declared that "If there is one thing in this country upon which men's minds are divided, if there is one thing which is contentious from top to bottom, it is the question of whether or not certain works are not to be carried on at the harbour".7 It was clear to many that Escombe was not only keen to rid the colony of a Harbour Board, but at the same time also to remove Cathcart Methven. Even before Act 3 of 1894 became law, Escombe had sent out a letter of dismissal to all officials of the Board, but while letters of re-instatement as civil servants were at the same time drawn up for all the other officials, Methven's name was missing from the list.s Although both T.K.