account of the meeting. I refer next, my lords, to the meeting of the

22,668. MR. HOEXTER urge hpon your lordships that his explanation about his 1 movements at that meeting may not be reasonably true.' (f) Accused's evidence in cross examination: Accused said he did not know whether the speeches had all been made by the time he left the meeting, but he did know that the meeting had not dispersed by the time he left. 5 He could not remember when Kumalo left, but he was adamant that Kumalo could not have left at the end of the speeches. Asked whether he was able to deny that he heard Resha make his speech he replied 'I do not remember.' KENNEDY J: Well, what does the Crown say we 10 mustdo about that? MR. HOEXTER: My lord, I have already intimated to your lordships that the Crown does not rely upon this as an overt act. KENNEDY J: Do you rely on it at all? 15 MR. HOEXTER: No, my lord, Resha 1 s speech I cannot iely on at this meeting. For the purposes of this meeting one can rely only on Kumalo's speech. This is mentioned just for the sake of completeness. My lords, the re xt meeting is the 4th March, 20 1956, at Ermelo; this meeting has already been considered in detail; my lords, I've made my submissions on that meeting. Fourie who was not cross examined gives a very readable account of the speeches; and in the light of that, of what he said, your lordships may safely accept Fourie's account as substantially correct. The next meeting, my lords, is the 25th March, 1956, at Evaton. The witness there was D/Sgt.Wessels - the chairman at that meeting was Kumalo and he referred

22,669. to the accused; he was chased from Bethai and he was now \ staying there, and he was continually being chased by the police. The Crown relies only on the ct that the accused spoke against- passes for women, as did tho accused Molife and that Mrs. Ranta was also a speaker at this meeting, and that she was reported as follows: - "The Freedom Charter was adopted and the people will rule; we are determined to fight for our freedom and we will get it. This Herinvolk oppression government is telling us a lot of fairy tales. Women in China decided to fight for their rights; why can't you African women not do the same? It is the duty of our African women to stand together and fight the oppress! on." And she referred to the deputations to the Union Building in connection with passes, and then the concluding portion of her speech was read by the witness, "In conclusion I want to tell this meeting that we are not alone; there are many countries standing behind us; we will stand behind our men folk. We will sacrifice and fight to the bitter end. We will go forward in spite of all the difficulties. Let us fight for our rights, let us stand together shoulder against shoulder and fight this Nat Government, a coward government which is going to be defeated. We will rule and this policeman and his colleagues will be taken to the concentration camps they are building for us. The Freedom Charter says the will of the people will rule." My lords, there the submission of the Crown is that it relies on the speech of Mrs. Ranta; the submission is that the cross examination is not destructive

22,670. MR. HOEXTER of this witness 1 account of the meeting. I refer next, my lords, to the meeting of the 13th May, 1956, at Evaton. My lords, I have not recorded the witness here. I think it must be D/Sgt.Wessels I shall give your lordships the reference presently. The first speaker at this meeting was Make. *. He also acted as interpreter for the next speaker who was Tsheshube. Tsheesube said "Sons and daughers, Mothers and Fathers, you will all want to know why I am crying as I stand here. I have been sent here; I am not the only one crying. Even the stones are crying. Remember when we had a meeting at the Church many years ago stones were thrown at me. The Creator sent me here to tell you people that our enemies must be exterminated." Then the next few words were not clear, and the speech continues: "Children of Tshaka and Moshesh, you must remember these people said a certain race will come out of the waters and oppressus. It happened. It is happening today. I am sent here by Tshaka and Moshesh, the time has come when we must fight for our children; we must defeat our enemies. My time of saying a lot is past. I end off by saying we here in Evaton all over the world know that the time has now arrived to act. Remove the chains of oppression and fight for the rights God gave you. Do not be afraid of gaols and not even death. for your rights. Fight Instead of helping us the whites are trying to break up the unity among us." Then, my lords, the accused was the next speake and the first part of this speech has been considered already. It is the speech where he says he scratches his head and he refers to the trigger happy Wessels, and then

22,671. he says a little later on, about the middle of the page: "Since the oppressors and their Italian allies are trying their best to drive you out of Evaton the police help them in their devilish efforts. When you fight in a struggle do not look only at the nearest enemy, look at all white people; they are all against us." Then he refers to the policeman who is taking down the notes and he says "This is not only a fight against the Bus company, it is against general oppression.." A little later on he refers to the fact that the police are given the right to shoot and at the top of the next page he says that the oppressors are playing with fire, one of these days their guns will be of no use to them, and so on. Then, my lords, after that Motsele - - first of all Mofoking and Molife and accused made speeches, ard then Motsele spoke at this meeting and his speech is reported as follows:- "Because blood has been shed we will win this Boycott in Evaton, and all other troubles in South Africa. We have no guns and we do not need them* I feel sorry for those poor fools with guns who are bought to shoot us. Be united, fight together. The people want to govern this country and we are going to govern this country one day. I feel that only another two years will pass before we have our freedom." Then, my lords, accused's evidence in chief - he commented on portions of his own speech; he admitted that Make interpreted for him; the accused said that he didn't accept the witness' report as being fair and accurate.

22,672. MR. HOEXTER My lords, there is a reference to his evidence in cross examination; this has already been made, and I repeat the submission I made at that stage, that the accused's own treatment is such that your lordships can accept the note as being substantially correct. The next meeting, my lords, is the Congress of the People Anniversary on the 24th June, 1956. My lords, here, too, as I mentioned before, this was laid as an overt act; the Crown does not rely on it as an overt act, but simply as a meeting and speeches which afford evidence of accused's activities and his knowledge This neeting has been fully dealt with on many occasions - it is proposed to refer to some of the speeches only. This was a short meeting at which the speeches were recorded in shorthand, my lords, and I refer first - turning over the page - to Sibande's own speech, that js the accused's own speech, my lords. He was reported by the witness Schoeman as follows: - n Mr Chairman, and friends, I am pleased to get this opportunity to speak, even if there is very little time for me to speak. As you know I am a lengthy speaker. As the Chairman has already promised me here that he is going to give me fifteen minutes, but I want to go beyond fifteen minutes, because I am very happy to come and speak to this Peopj.es Parliament. You c an see this is the Peoples Parliament; I am not afraid of anything because this is a Parliament that was formed by the entire people of South Africa." Then he refers to the fact that the first bricks of Parliament were laid in the previous year. Then he makes certain references to the Freedom Charter

22,673. and then beginning with page 18, my lords, the witness reported him as follows: "If you are fighting an oppressed people you must have a very short time to do so. If you continue to oppress him then you never know when he shall throw you off; when we speak we speak the truth that nobody can change. There is nothing that can stop these things from happening. For a long time we have spoken in many languages, and these languages never paid any fruit. We have tried by all means that the people must understand; we have spoken in all languages so that the people can understand. If these people who fail to understand those languages, we are marching forward to freedom. There is nothing that can stand before us; even if our eyes are being shut freedom is ours. Fellow Africans, prepare yourselves for freedom; if you yourself do not re-dedicate yourselves there is nobody that can reinforce you. The only thing to do is that everybody must be prepared day and night. If we are prepared there is nothing that will stand before us. We know very well that our leaders are not with us to-day but as I speak here I see Dr.Dadoo here next to me; when I look further I see J.B. Marks watching me. I am telling the truth. Their spirit is not where they are sitting now but here with us. Their spirit is more than the spirit of all the people assembled here to-day; let us not shut up because of the banning of our leaders. Their spirit is always with us, the people." Then he dealt with the treatment of the people at Bethal and the last portion quoted here is where the accused says "Friends, as I am speaking here to-day, perhaps some of us are speaking here for the last time. Tomorrow the

22,674. Government may be acting upon us. Even if it be so let us re-dedicate ourselves because freedom is not far. Yes, freedom, even if it takes us ten years to be liberated then it will be we who are running away from freedom. I think five years is enough. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me this opportunity." My lords, this was the meeting in respect of which the accused said that he was not present for any of the speeches made before or after his own, and my lords, here again the Crown cannot challenge that evidence-. (d) Comments on cross examination. The accused said that he was invited to make this speech and he knew all about the preparation for this meeting. And I mention the fact that he gave an explanation of his movements on the day in question, how he timed his arrival for his speech and why and how he made a quick departure after hjs speech. Now, my lords, before I deal with the last section in proof of overtacts I wish to refer briefly to a portion of the accused's evidence in connection with the Western Areas, My lords, before I do that may I refer to page 7772 in the evidence of Van Zyl Schoeman at the Anti- Apartheid Conference. It was put to me by his lordship Mr. justice Bekker, whether on the assumption that the accused was interpreted, the interpreter was supplied by the Security Branch, or by the meeting - - I read from line 13 - - it was put to Sohoeman: After that, the chairman spoke again? (A) Correct." ("Q) And what did the chairman s ay? (A) I now call upon Mr. Subande who supports

22,675. MR.- HOEXTER the call for volunteers made by Mr. Sitole. ("Q) Did Sibande then speak? (Sibande spoke in a to native language and it was interpreted into English." ("Q) By whom was it interpreted? (A) I made no note of this so I don't know." ("Q) But was it interpreted specially to you, or...? (A) No, generally to the meeting." ("Q) Who provided the interpreter? (A) Well, at these meetings they provided their own interpreters." And then he goes on to the speech. My lords, the portion to which I refer is in Vol. 83; it begins at page 17452. It was put to him that I read from line 19 - ("Q) Yesterday a speech was put to you; the speech we have already considered, vhere Motsele spoke. Turning now to the speech you made on that occasion do you remember that you referred to the impending removal of Sophiatown by the Government? (A) My lords, I do not remember exactly what I said on that day but as I say it is common with me to have made such remarks, because that was something that was within me at the time." ("Q) You felt very strongly about this removal scheme? (A) Yes. " ("Q) And you felt very strongly that there should be resistance by the people of Sophiatown to the removal? (A) Yes. ( ll Q) Did you think - as it has been recorded - that other members of your organisation thought that the Government wanted to use the removal of Sophiatown to stage a blood bath? (A)-iNo. " ("Q) Did you see in the removal a possible threat,

22,676. to peace, or a danger to life and limb? Did it seem to you to be a potentially dangerous situation? No, I did not think so. You see, we.'ve had evidencein this Court that the African National ^ongress speakers say on the one side there is the Government, which is determined to move the people, and on the other side there are the residents of the Western Areas and they are equally determined not to be moved. Was that how you saw the situation? (A) My lords, when we spoke about Sophiatown,by talking about Sophiatown, we were facing the police, but because we knew that the Government had had a discussion about Sophiatown and were determined, we were therefore facing the Government. therefore the residents expected that the Government would come to them* " ("Q) Now when you spoke at the Anti-Apartheid meeting, did you tell the volunteers that from time to time they would receive directives? (A) Yes." ("Q) You took part in the campaign against the removal of the Western Areas? Yes, ("Q) What instructions were given to the volunteers about resisting the removal 1 - of the Western Areas? (A) The volunteers were not the people who had to resist removal, it was the people of Sophiatown..he volunteers were our mouthpiece, they would work with the people of Sophiatown?-- (A) My lord&i, the volunteers had to do all the work. Say for instance we had to have a meeting right now and there was no time for leaflets the volunteers are there for such things. They would then go out and tell the people that the people must attend a meeting now.

22,677. ("Q) Were the people themselves told how to resist the removal? (A) Yes." ("Q) What were they told? (A) Firstly we met together so that we could go and see the attorneys, and then to find out the legal position about Sophiatown, Then we found out there was no lav; yet to force you to move, there would be no law we would break by not removing. We then told the people that there was no law already made, that if they did not move rhey would break laws; we then said to the people 'If you refuse the police will then issue you with a summons and then you will go to Court'. ("Q) Is that all?-- (A) Yes, what I remember." ("Q) In your language is it possible to say 'Let them remove Sophiatown over our dead bodies? (A) There is no talk in my language to say that; there are no such words in my language." ("Q) There is no idiom like that in your language? Is there an idiom somewhat similar conveying the same meaning? (A) I don? t know how ^ can. put it " ("Q) I want to refer ycu briefly to a report that was banded into this Court, and reference, my lords, is made to A,162; it was put to him at line 10 on the next page, "Do you know that the African National Congress produced such a report at all? (A) My lord, I would not remember." ("Q) You see, that report examines the weaknesses of the Western Areas Campaign, and that report says that the major weakness of the campaign was the failure of the leaders to tell the people precisely what form of resistance was to be offered on the actual day of removal. Now you took part in that campaign, didn't you, Sibande? (A) Yes,"

22,678. ("Q) Do you agree with this criticism? (A) No." ("Q) You see, this report suggests that over a period of months the people were told 'You must not move, you must not go voluntarily" and the people expected that instructions would come from the leaders as to what would be done on the very day of removal, and that no such instructions were given? (A) My lords 5 I wouldn't say that there were no instructions; there were no written instructions because I have already said that the volunteers were the people who we were using. They were to do this work." ("Q) Do you remember when the witness Luthuli gave evidence in this Court? (A) I do remember." ("Q) Do you remember he said in cross examination he felt that this was a criticism, that the people were not told at the final stage what to do? (A) He should not have said that, my lords. Firstly, he was far away and I remember secondly, he was not well at the time." ("Q) Didn't the people ask the leaders exactly what they should do on that day of removal? (A) No, they had been told; they did not ask because they had been told." ("Q) So your evidence then is that the people were fully instructed as to exactly what they should do? (A) Yes." ("Q) And as you saw the situation there was no danger about the removal at all? (A) Yes," ("Q) There was no possibility of any violence or bloodshed? (A) No." ("Q) And so far as you know was this also the view of other leaders of the African National Congress in the Transvaal? (A) Yes." By his lordship Mr. Justice Bekker:- ("Q) Did you tell the people what the next step should be -

22,679. after they had been summoned to go to the Magistrate? (A) No, the whole thing would come out in Court; what they would do would be decided in Court," ("Q) Could you just tell me what advice you gave to the pe'ople as to how they should resist? (A) Yes, my lords; we said to them by not going they would not be breaking any laws; there was only one thing they would do, that is to summon the person or persons to go to the Court." ("Q) Yes, and then? (A) Then they, the volunteers, would be there to explain to them full well all the time, at any time. If the police were determined that they should leave, the police would say 'go 1 and then they must say 'We are not going'. Then if the police are determined the first thing they will do will be to take their belongings and load those on to the lorries. If they have loaded the stuff on to the lorries then there is nothing else they, the people, can do; they are then forced to follow their belongings." By Counsel: - ("Q) When was that said to the people? (A) All the time, and as the day was drawing nearer e " ("Q) Who said that to the people? (A) The volunteers." ("Q) Were the volunteers instructed to do that? (A) Yes." ("Q) Who instructed the volunteers to do that? The chief of the volunteers who was in Sophiatown." ("Q) You are now saying that this was the instruction given by the accused Resha to the volunteers in Sophiatown? (A) Yes, and the branches." ("Q) Were you present at the meeting when such instruction was given? (A) I remember on one occasion there was a meeting in the offices of the Volunteers; I was present /

22,680. MR. HOEXTER and I also spoke at that meeting." ("Q) Yes? (A) And I then told the volunteers what was expected of them - what they had to do on this day of removal; they had to be at the spot which had to be removed; they wouldn't be a group - they might be one or two to a house, but they would be around to watch and see." 5 By his lordship: - ("Q) See what? (i ) My lord, they had already told the people it could happen that one person may, after the police had taken that person's belongings and put it on to the lorry, that that person might still stand there. Then the police might mishandle that person, but the volunteers were there to see that the person should not go to that extent." ("Q) What was the volunteer to do? (A) The volunteer would go to the person and say to that person 'Look man, 15 they have loaded your belongings, there isnothing else that you can do now, so follow." ("Q) And was this frequently impressed upon the people by the volunteers? (A) Yes." ("Q) Was this also impressed on the people in the area con- 20 cerned? (A) Yes." My lords. Counsel then puts to him that on his evidence it's nonsense to suggest that the volunteers were not fully instructed. Now; ny lords, the submission is that it is 25 clear on the extract that's been read that the accused was actively involved in the Western Areas campaign., Now your lordships will ask the question, whether any man, particularly a man occupying such a position in the 10

22,681. African National Congress, and "being actively involved in the campaign, can any such man honestly have the impression that the situation in Sophiatown was not a tense one and "brimful of danger? He says it wasn't my lords. He says there was no possibility of violence or bloodshed. He attends this speech where Resha said - where he foreshadows the clash that is going to take place in Sophiatown, and I ask your lordships to find as a fact that at that speech, at that meeting at which Motsele spoke and at which the accused spoke thereafter, the accused, whether or not it's possible to express the view in his tongue, 'They shall take Sophiatown over our dead bodies', expressed sentiments conveying that meaning, because he must have known, and he did in fact know that everywhere the residents of the Western Areas were being urged to resist to the last man. Under these circumstances, my lords, the accused cannot pretend, with submission, that the situation in Sophiatown was not an extremely dangeruus one, and that his Congress had contributed to that danger by whipping up the feelings of the people, and at the final stage leaving them to grope with uncertain facts re the precise form of resistance. I can take that matter no higher than that, my lords. My lords, in conclusion then I deal with the proof of the overt act; the Crown submits that the accused's hostile intent and his adherence to the conspiracy alleged in the Indictment is clearly to be inferred from the accused' various activities, and his state of mind during the period of the Indictment, as hereinbefore set forth. The Crown relies more particularly on the following facts:

22,682. (a) The accused's association with the African National Congress for some thirty years, and his active participation at all times in the affairs of Congress. He vsas a member of the Transvaal Executive throughout the period of the Indictment and he served on the National Executive for the period of the Indictment, 1955 to 1956, my lords; he attended at least four national conferences of the A.N.C. in the period 1951 to 1956. Now, my lords, I haven't specifically referred to them "but that would imply some knowledge of exhibits such as A,37, the Durban Conference in December, 1954; it would imply knowledge of what went on in Bloemfontein December 1955, as evidenced in LLM.81. My lords, the fact that he had this position, that he attended these national conferences, is a fact with respect that must weigh heavily with your lordships. (b) Accused's support of the Liberatory struggle in this country and was aware that Congress saw the local struggle as part of a broader struggle in Africa and throughout the world. (c) Accused saw South Africa as a country ruled by ruthless Fascists who knew how to silence the masses only by shooting them. Accused knew that it was the aim of the Congress Movement to take over the Government and rule the country. Accused accepted the terms of the Freedom Charter and took part in the collection of demands for inclusion therein. (d) Accused was committed to a course of unconstitutional and illegal action as a political method. He told meetings that the time for speeches had passed and that the time for action had arrived. He foresaw the like-

22,683. lihood of violence as the result of such a struggle, and he warned his followers that they should be prepared to died blood on the road to freedom. He participated in the Defiance Campaign. He regarded the police as traitors and spies who were ready to shoot the people, but that they would be dealt with in due course. RUMPFF J; V/hich is that reference? MR. HOEXTER: My lord, that reference would be first of all the nee ting at Ermelo, at which he was chairman; and the meeting at which Johanna Tshubungu made a speech - that would be one example. My lord, there are other examples. RUMPFF J: Well, you say this because of the speech of Johanna? MR. HOEXTER: Yes, my lord. RUMPFF J: Not because of his own speech? MR. HOEXTER: And because he was present at other meetings at which the same sentiment was expressed, my lord. They have been referred to in the previous section, my lord. RUMPFF J; Because of speeches of others? MR. HOEXTER: Yes, my lord. RUMPFF J: He himself has always taken a different line, according to the evidence, MR. HOEXTER: Well, my lord, I say he maintains - he said two things, my lord: he said first of all his own attitude had been consistently sympathetic, (b) he said that he had never at any A.N.C. meeting heard threats being made to the police. I say that this section on meetings shows that at several meetings... RUMPFF J: The highest you can put it is that whereas he connived at others saying this, he didn't reject ' *

22,684. this, but his own statements are not along the same lines. 1 MR. HOEXTER; That is so, my lords. I used the word 'regarded' there chiefly because of the Eraelo meeting where he was the chairman and where that speech was put to him and he was invited to comment on it. (e) Accused supported all the campaigns which 5 the A.N.C. organised as part of the struggle for libera^ tion, and he took part in the campaign against the removal of the Western Areas. (f) Accused was a freedom volunteer; he took the pledge and he accepted the fact that the freedom io volunteers would be exposed to greater dangers than ordinary members of Congress. (g) He attended meetings, the nature and extent of which has been considered in the previous section. My lords, as far as nee tings are concerned the 15 Crown relies now only on two - the first (a) is the meeting at Alexandra on the 7th March, 1954; 1 repeat with respect there was no cross examination in respect of Masilele's evidence on this meeting; Masilele said that the accused was present and that he was the last 20 speaker before Molife; the evidence is that before the accused spoke iiene, who was the chairman, and Motsele and Mavuso and Molife spoke; 4) the portions of Motsele's speech set forth in Schedule 'C' are to be found in the evidence of Miasilele on the following pages. 25 And my lords, I must ask your lordships to make a note at this juncture; your lordships will see that in respect of this meeting Sibande's own speech is laid - a portion of that is laid against him as an overt act, if I may just give your lordships and my learned 0

22,685. friend the references in Masilele's evidence to the portions of Sibande's speech set forth in Schedule 'C'; there are two at page 8794, lines 10 to 14, and on the same page 8794, line 22 to 24. My lords, the accused's comments on this meeting have been dealt with and I content myself with the submission that this overt act has been proved against the accused. I turn to the last overt act, my lords, the meeting on the 27th June, 1954, the anti-apartheid conference; speeches recorded by a shorthand writer. (ii) The evidence shows that the accused was present and spoke; in any case the accused admitted that he attended and spoke. Then I deal first with the portion of Moretsele's speech, set forth in Schedule 'C' where they are to be found in the evidence of the witness, Coetzee. The portions of Vundla's speech, set forth in Schedule.'C 1 and lastly the portions of the accused's own speech testified to by the witness Schoeman, My lords, it is submitted with respect that this overt act, too, has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt against the accused. I wish to say nothing further about the case of this accused except again in assessing the extent of the knowledge of the situation in the Western Areas your lordships will have careful regard to the speech made on this meeting - at this meeting - by Vundla, which is a very strong one.

Collection: 1956 Treason Trial Collection number: AD1812 PUBLISHER: Publisher:- Location:- 2011 Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg 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.