In terms of support, Bengt Sundkler’s 1948 comment is still apposite. Congress (and perhaps its organ) grew ‘out of the resentment against the passing of the Natives Land Act’; it ‘reached the peak of its influence about 1918–24; it later lost its grip on the masses’.127 The issue of being an ANC ‘organ’ arises again. After his election as ANC president in 1927 J. T. Gumede made the paper the national organ, but it was in decline by then. Skota’s 1929 report as ANC secretary general states (somewhat elliptically) that ‘[t]he Abantu Batho affair is somewhat complicated, but I am sure the President and other officers will submit a clear report on the Abantu Batho’.128 Gumede took on its financial liability on behalf of the ANC, but Seme deposed him in 1930. The ironic result was a press both pro-and anti-Congress, critical of the new leadership, but gathering around it some ANC stalwarts. The end came in July 1931, and this is discussed in the Conclusion to this volume.
DRAMATIS PERSONAE: THE EDITORIAL STAFF
There are many incompletely answered questions on editorial matters. Who were the editors and over which periods? How did they share responsibility? Was there a coordinating editor? How did they interact with correspondents and the public? What role did they play in politics? Was their remuneration so modest that most were ‘editor-journalists’?
Abantu-Batho had diverse staff. In 1914 the editor of Tsala ea Batho, Plaatje, commenting on a caustic attack by Abantu-Batho on white missions, explained, ‘Abantu-Batho enjoys the unique privilege of being financed by a black capitalist. Consequently it can afford some luxuries’ such as ‘a staff of some half a dozen sub-editors.’ Hence at times it might carry the ‘occasional inconsequential scratching of a journalistic booby even though he happens to be attached to the editorial staff’.129 Such editorial diversity was not the case on all black papers. Abantu-Batho pointed to the one-man band of Jabavu’s Imvo: ‘Mr. Jabavu’s party – if at all he has any – and the people en masse often spoken of by him, are the Editor, his pen, ink and paper, but surely not his staff.’130
The ideas of editors emerge in the chapters that follow. In the Appendix we list them as best we know; here I summarise their roles. The first managing editor, from 1912 until probably 1916, was Pixley ka Isaka Seme (1881–1951), who chaired the initial board of directors.131 He had no known prior press experience, but may have served briefly as editor in 1916 and/or 1918. The editorial staff comprised the various language editors and sometimes a coordinating editor. A 1914 letterhead of the paper lists C. Kunene and D. S. Letanka as editors.132 Cleopas Kunene (1866–1917) was inaugural editor in English and isiZulu from October 1912 to December 1915, and perhaps again from July 1916 until his death in 1917. Daniel Simon Letanka (1874–1932) was Sesotho/Setswana editor for the paper’s lifespan, a director, and succeeded Seme as managing editor. Saul Msane (1856–1919) was editor from January to July 1916;133 Robert Grendon (1867–1949) from late 1915 to July 1916. The acting Director of Native Labour stated categorically in 1916 that there were then ‘three joint Editors’: ‘Robert Grendon a coloured man who deals with the English portions, Saul Msane responsible for Zulu and Daniel Letanka who deals with the Sesuto portion.’134 Levi Thomas Mvabaza (1870s–1947) was editor and managing director for the period 1916–31 in charge of isiXhosa columns.135 Jeremiah Dunjwa (d. 1935) joined the staff in 1913 and became isiXhosa editor. T. D. (Trevor Dan) Mweli Skota (1893–1976) served as organiser/sub-editor in 1912, returning as editor in 1927. Sub-editors or writers included Msane’s son, Herbert, Horatio Bud-M’belle and Richard Victor Selope Thema (1886–1955) from about 1916 until at least mid-1920.136 During his 1930–33 banishment from Natal, A. W. G. Champion (1893–1975) was an editor from 1930 to 1931. Selby Msimang (1886–1982) was the paper’s ‘Special Commissioner’137 in 1913 and may have continued in some capacity until 1918. Cleopas Solomon Mabaso (d. 1935) was the long-serving secretary of Abantu-Batho Ltd, while Josiah Tshangana Gumede (1867–1947) was owner from 1929 until the end in 1931.
A closer examination of the staff provides insights into the nature of the paper. Seme is credited with the idea of a national paper tied to Congress. Thema, who came to work on the paper a few years after its founding, later wrote, ‘[n]o sooner was the Congress established than Pixley Seme conceived the idea of establishing a newspaper which could be used as a mouthpiece of the national organisation’. Through Seme’s ‘enthusiasm and indefatigable energy’ he effected successful mergers and formed a viable company for Abantu-Batho.138 His story is told in chapter 3 by Chris Saunders.
As founder and managing editor, Seme was responsible for appointing editors and raising funds. I estimate his role was most effective between 1912 and 1916. In a 1924 interview he recalled that he appointed Cleopas Kunene, whom he knew well, as editor and later ‘sold the paper to a syndicate or company’, although he does not give a date.139 Seme’s direct editorial role is unclear. One instance is an article in January 1916 satirical of the British war effort, suggesting that if Africans were ever called to arms they might well fight under the Zulu king.140 Earlier, the Director of Native Labour had warned Seme of legal action if he failed to observe wartime regulations, claiming Abantu-Batho had contravened regulations prohibiting publication of items from a ‘hostile press’.141 In 1916 officials claimed that he was liable for prosecution. Duly interviewed, Seme admitted writing the article and received a ‘severe caution’.142 This was a difficult time for him. He suffered losses in land transactions, while a legal case forced him to sell possessions such as a typewriter and galvanised iron buildings from his home in Sophiatown, where the paper’s press also was located,143 likely impacting its solvency and inclining him to become less involved. The radicalism of 1918–20 would have repelled him, but by then he was distancing himself and may have sold his shares to Mvabaza in 1916.144 As detailed below, Seme later established his own paper to undermine Abantu-Batho.
Cleopas Kunene was inaugural editor from 1912 to late 1915.145 He ‘ran the paper with considerable success’. Its letterhead gives him and Letanka as the editors and Mabaso as general agent.146 Of Swazi background and with roots in Edendale, he had served as interpreter for the 1894 Swazi delegation to Britain,147 worked as a teacher and as editor of Ipepa lo Hlanga and was prominent in Congress.148 Kunene edited the English and isiZulu pages until early 1916, when apparently he was reproved either for sticking too much to English, as gossip had it,149 or as Christison suggests, for financial reasons no doubt exacerbated by Seme’s pecuniary losses.150 After Msane and Grendon were removed, Kunene resumed the editor’s chair for a final stint before his death in 1917.151 Natal teacher Josiah Mapumulo remarked on his ‘vigorous, trenchant style’ and that ‘his untimely death closes an interesting chapter in the history of Native journalism’.152
Sesotho editor Daniel Simon Letanka was the longest-serving editor. He had roots in the Rustenburg area and probably ties with local chiefs, remaining close to the Upper House and serving as secretary of the ANC Council of Chiefs in the 1920s (see chapter 8 in this volume). He was a SANNC vice-president.153 His main political activity, however, was in the TNC. In 1913 he was vice-chairman, a position he still held in 1921.154 Skota describes him as the TNC’s ‘moving spirit’. He expressed consistently radical views. In April 1916 he spoke at Johannesburg Trades Hall on ‘Trade unions and the native question’, when he ‘humorously referred to the missionary fraud. They had told them to fear God and live in peace, but behind them came the troops.’155 Gaoled in the 1918 strikes, he died in 1932 ‘penniless … after years of supporting himself on his small income’ from Abantu-Batho. Skota claims that Letanka ‘never received nor demanded compensation’