To return to our narrative of events that came within the sphere of our activity, while we never attempted anything in the way of reforming the Capitalist system, we often made emphatic protests against many of their brutal deeds.

In 1921 there was an assembly of religious Natives who met at their church owned, with considerable land surrounding it, by their Prophet, a Native called Enock. It was at a place called Bullhoek in Grahamstown, in the Eastern Province of Cape Colony. There was about 400 of the congregation and they called themselves, Israelites". They were so inspired by their church services and common brother-hood that they were loath to leave and return to their former homes. Enock raised no objection, so they started to build huts and till the land to supply them with vegetation for their sustenance.

Municipal laws are very strict in every town and dorp in South Africa about where they establish Native locations; they of course want them as near as possible while they are at work, but as far away as possible when they have finished work. It is only a year or two ago that Cape Town pushed the Native population about five miles farther away to, they told them, give them better housing conditions, and, of course, higher rents and more in train fares, which has been the bone of contention with them ever since. Neither the Municipality at Bullhoek, nor the good Christian people in that area welcomed this new very religious assembly as an addition to their pious flock.

"Colour bars" are as definite in the Church as in the rest of our social life, forgetting, of course, that on those grounds they could not admit their own Christ of oriental origin. They therefore advised Enock and his followers that a Native location could not be established in that urea. The Israelites ignored the order to move and continued to plant and pray to their Lord Jehovah to save and protect them. The Government were then advised of the position, and they, true to their reputation of dealing with disputes, sent down 400-armed police under the command of Colonel Truter, who delivered an ultimatum to them, telling them to disperse. Enock declared he was guided by Jehovah and not by Colonel Truter, and they resolutely stood their ground, praying and thanking Jehovah who had delivered them from the land of bondage to their liberty and freedom.

However, pious and sentimental creeds are not of much concern to the administrative bodies of South Africa when dealing with the Native question, therefore there was no investigation as to their sacred purpose. Neither did there appear to be any consideration of adopting other ways and means of compelling them to surrender. They could have starved them to it, or arrested them in groups, as the Natives were unarmed. On the contrary they adopted all the tactics of war strategy, surrounding the camp, placing artillery and machine guns in position ready for necessity. When the Natives refused to disperse they opened fire and kept it up until they killed most of the 400 there assembled. As proof of the Natives being unarmed, not one of the attacking forces received so much as a serious wound. There was a rush by the Natives at the finish, but they had little with which to defend themselves.

In addition to protests even Johannesburg Star - the Government's own organ-severely reproached such tactics. Socialists, however, have always a more deliberate way of saying exactly what they mean. Hence the S.D.F. of Cape Town soon made emphatic forms of protests by holding several way mass meetings in several parts in town. At these meetings Comrades D.L. Dryburg and William Green used what they thought to be a very apt phrase to suit the situation. They described Colonel Truter, who was in charge of the troops, as a brutal assassin." Subsequently a committee was formed to draw up a leaflet of protect for distribution at the meetings. I, as secretary, was authorized to write up the leaflet, according to the dictation of the committee. The day of the shooting happened to be on Empire Day-a South Africa public holiday-and the committee were sarcastic enough to make the leaflet show that this was an appropriate celebration of all that the developments of empire mean. It was worded thus (I quote from a reprint of our preliminary examination the published in the Cape Times of June 28 th , 1921):

"MURDER! MURDER! !

MURDER!! ! "

THE BULLHOEK MASSACRE.

"Christians Slaughter Their Christian Brethren. "Great Empire Day Celebration.

"How appropriate and how much in keeping with the Matabele Massacre and other of their brutal empire-building tactics. And the Bullhoek tragedy was either by fate or circumstances enacted on their very Empire Day.

"We accuse the responsible Government, whose forces are headed by a brutal assassin, of murdering unarmed strikers in Johannesburg, 1913, slaughtering unarmed Natives in Port Elizabeth, 1920, and their latest debauch is the gruesome mutilation of hundreds of Natives who were Christians and a passive community.

"Hence this brutal invasion is truly symbolical of Governmental tyranny in their hysterical efforts to exploit the workers, irrespective of their particular colour or religious beliefs, and to maintain their position functioned by an idle and parasitic class. Their armies are ever available to suppress any libertarian effort from the oppressing yoke of Capitalism. A condemnation meeting will be held on the Parade at n a.m. Sunday morning; Sunday evening, Adderley Street; St. Mark's Schoolroom, Tennant Street, Monday evening, 30th. "

We were charged with contravening the Placaat of March 7th, 1754 -not unite as far back as the ten commandments, which they violated and we obeyed:

"It is hereby further and likewise earnestly forbidden that any one, of whatever rank, condition and quality he may be, shall make, print, issue, disseminate, propagate, spread or post up all such or other offensive, rebellious and libellous lampoons and prints, by whatever name or title they may be called on penalty of for­feiture of the aforesaid writings and of a fine of three thousand gulden for the first time and arbitrary correction (after being placed in the writ of exigent goods), and for the second time of a fine of six thousand gulden and further under penalty of at least of banishment for ever from the Province of Holland and West Vriesland. And in case the aforesaid persons be not able to pay the above mentioned respective fines, they shall be publicly whipped and banished for ever from the Province of Holland and West Vriesland."

I made personal objections to the words brutal assassin" because I said the Government would take exception to such words against their officials. This was soon proved to be true, as, meetings soon afterwards Comrade William Dryburgh, father of D.L. Dryburgh was asked for his name and address when distributing them. This, of course, meant that they would also find the author. The printers were therefore interviewed and the written manuscript found in my handwriting, and all the information they wanted about the person that gave the order for the printing, myself. The opportunity was then taken to round us all up and W. Dryburgh, W. Green and myself were arrested and used for drunks, of which there appeared Wale Street, when the headquarters of the police was the large Provincial Council Building now stands. The police van the "Black Maria," subsequently came, in which we were tightly enclosed to hide our blushes from the general public on our way to Roeland Street gaol. There we stayed until all the routine completed to bail us out. The usual cell accommodation even for Comrade Dryburgh, sen., in his distributing a leaflet.

It was, of course, a case for the Supreme Court, and the Government took the opportunity to indemnify their action by bringing all those concerned from Bullhoek, also Colonel Truter of the S.A. Police. When I say "those concerned" I mean all the Government authorities there, including the magistrate. All the implements of "war" found on the settlement were also brought to show what might, or could, have been done by the Natives if they hadn't had their brains blown out to prevent them, which really happened. There was an apology for a rifle and a crude-looking sword, with implements said to have been used I am not suggesting that those few obsolete weapons frightened the South African troops into action, but I do suggest that an order must have been given the officer in command to deal with them in the manner they did. We may take the almost parallel case in Amritsar in India. There the general concerned was severely censured. There was no attempt at such with Colonel Truter, in fact the whole court proceedings was to justify his action. They might otherwise have arrested them in groups, given them tear gas or starved them into surrender, if such questions had been thought out.

However, the trial proceeded and our crime was for describing wholesale slaughter as "murder," and the officer concerned as the "brutal assassin" to do the job. D. L. Dryburgh and W. Green were tried first, under the Old Dutch Common Law for "criminal slander.' That means by words they slandered in describing Colonel Truter as a "brutal assassin." I have no evidence of their defence before me. One reason-the Press were not concerned with our point of view, only to screen the Government. They were each fined £40 or three months' hard labour. This sum was promptly paid by our treasurer, possibly with the best of intentions in the interest of the comrades concerned, but which many of us much regretted, as in such cases there are and have been many ways in which we evaded such fines. We thought of how the authorities would smile at our cheque, which they knew, of course, reduced our propaganda fund accordingly.

William Dryburgh and I came next as we were associated with the leaflet, which was described in the indictment as "criminal libel." The Attorney General then announced that we would be tried, not only under the Common Law, but under an Old Dutch Placaat of 1754. It was said that those convicted under this law could be "publicly whipped and banished." Well I thought, I missed the 1914 deportations- I suppose this will mean the same thing and a hiding with it.

William Dryburgh, as I have stated, was in his eightieth year; he was a master tailor in Edinburgh, as two of his sons were who are now in Cape Town. He knew Keir Hardie and many of the old revolutionaries, for which Scotland is particularly noted. We was a well-read man and of a most kindly disposition. Some questions were put to him in the witness box as to whether he had his classes on when distributing the leaflet, and was he able to read its contents? Did he assume the pamphlet accused [he Government official of murder ; "Whatever it said," retorted Comrade Dryburgh, "the deed was a very murderous affair." He had no apologies to make. "The sentence in your case." said Judge Searle, "will be £10 or fourteen days" hard labour."

Advocate Morris Alexander defended us all and was useful in pointing out that the old Placaat was not law in this country, and also-showed that before our case it had only been used once in a century. Then, in the Anglo-Boer War, when Albert Cartwright and F. S. Malan, editors of Onse Land and the South African Nell's respectively, were indicted under it for publishing seditious statements in their respective papers against England's war policy on the Boer Republic. The judge over-ruled the former exception, that it was not law in this country, but gave us the right to appeal before the Appellate Court to test its validity in reference to our case. The trial lasted three days, during which the Government put all their witness in the box to give details justifying their action. Alexander then put in the witness box to defend our position against the cross-examination of the Attorney General.

He started thus:

"You are a Socialist concerned with Socialist propaganda, therefore what concern is it of yours to interfere with Governmental administration of the Natives of this country?" I replied: ''The Socialists have two forms of propaganda-the positive and the negative. The negation of all that is brutal and evil, therefore the massacre of the Bullhoek Natives comes under that heading. Our positive formula is on the" thesis of Marxian International Socialism "."What, then," he continued, do you mean by describing a Government official, who was doing his duty as such, as a hired brutal assassin?"

Here I had to defend a statement I had objected to myself. I admitted that it did sound a terrible indictment, but man the English language meant the same thing. If we had said that Colonel Truter was employed by the Government to shoot the Natives at Bullhoek there would not appear to be much harm in the statement, but if we read "hired" for "employed" and assassinate" for "shoot" it sounds more terrible with the same meaning. We did not indict Colonel Truter-personally I am sorry for him. (This produced roars of laughter, in which Colonel Truter joined) It is the Government sitting on those green benches in Parliament we have indicted, who sent Colonel Truter to do their brutal work."

The court began to be amused and the Attorney General did not feel quite in their confidence, so he retorted rather abruptly, "We know all about your oratory-why don't you stick to the truth?" I wrote the Press a letter which appeared the following day, saying that it hardly became the duty of an Attorney General to impute ' the witness box, was telling lies, which the words "why don't you stick to the truth" must mean; they published it. At the close o examination by the Attorney General I was congratulated by Advocate Alexander for "having justified your position.

Judge Searle, however, did not seem to view things so much in our favour. Alexander drew his attention to an article in the Johannesburg Star, which in more diplomatic language meant the same thing as our indictment; which also, even as the organ of the Smuts Government, attacked General Smuts for his "unwarrantable attack on Mr. A. G. Barlow because he demanded in the House of Assembly an inquiry into the Bullhoek tragedy." The Capitalist Press, however, were not anxious to show, as our learned lawyer said, that we justified our position," but rather did the Cape Argus characterise all my evidence in the brief statement as "an harangue from the witness box." Little wonder Socialists are often induced to talk about the "partisan Press." I have before me two long columns of Mr. Justice Searle's "interesting address to the jury," published in the Cape Argus, October 14 th , 1921, in which he reviewed several of my previous convictions in 1914-16, "Contravening Public Welfare Act," and that, "The sentence that should be passed upon you should be a fine of £75 or six months' imprisonment."

Judge Searle reminded Dryburgh and Green that if they came before him again he would give them imprisonment without the option of a fine. But, alas, providence or the many inefficiencies of the present system that cause so much disaster decreed otherwise. There was no second time for Mr. Searle to judge them; he was killed in a railway accident at Salt River soon afterwards. That then ended Justice Searle and his farewell wishes for us. Possibly a kindly man in all his walk of private life, but court life under the present system, moulds them into automatons to protect it, whatever its fallacies.

However, our notice of appeal was lodged and Advocate F. A. W. Lucas subsequently brought the case before the Appellate Court at Bloemfontein, the Supreme Court of the land. They found the old Placaat obsolete, and with it went the suggested fine or imprisonment of William Dryburgh and myself. So ended one of the most interesting trials ever held in the courts of Cape Town. It is now often used, I have heard, in the education of the law students at the University. It is described, I believe, as "Rex v. Harrison and others." though I think the "others" though I think the "others" were more responsible for the case being brought before the court than myself. Which of the two coined the phrase "brutal assassin ' I have never known.

Moses Baritz

About this time we were favoured by a visit from England of one of their peculiar propagandists in the person of Moses Baritz. He hailed from Manchester. Harry Pollitt, general secretary of the Communist Party, refers to him in his book serving My Time. He was an individualist in character, could lecture on anything and made a special -study of Shakespeare. He used to attend the Country Forum in Manchester. He also occasionally worked his passage on merchant vessels to different parts of the world. I believe he got his living in America as a critic of music, contributing such to one of their papers. However, he was known too well by the authorities for them to allow him to land in Cape Town. He sent appeals to our party to help him to do so. I, as secretary, interviewed Mr. Kentridge, then a Labour M.P., but he could do nothing, so he and I went down to the ship to see him. Moses was very noisy about it all. I made further attempts and another visit, but still Moses seemed to assume we had not done our best about it. To convince me of his abilities, he said: "I tell you, Harrison, I am no ordinary speaker." I had already gathered that. Moses wailed until the last, but to no avail. They would not let him land in Cape Town. W. Green, since of Cape Town, had the recently arrived from Manchester, and told me of many of Moses exploits there.

His ship then proceeded to Durban and, strange to say, they allowed him to land there. This appeared to be at the time Norrie was holding a meeting in the Gardens-I believe on a Sunday evening. Moses, as usual, wanted to make himself heard and began to heckle Norrie, but was promptly told either to wait or shut up. "All right said Moses, "I'll stand here"-in close proximity to Norrie's rostrum. And it was soon evident, as he told me, that he was no ordinary speaker", as he had soon monopolised the whole meeting and meeting and according to the report I received about it, Norrie had soon to be the listener. I am not justifying Moses' attitude, but that was his way; a man with outstanding abilities who had rarely the tact or common sense to know the fitness of things, or to consider others' opinions.

Pollitt reports his death in his book, so if he has gone to that place where many wished him to go I am sure he will be heard even there.