The terms of reference for the Land Commission were clearly defined by the Governor of Southern Rhodesia who had appointed the Land Commission. The Land Commission was to ‘enquire into and report upon the expediency and practicability of setting apart defined areas outside the boundaries of the native reserves’ writes Dr Felix Muchemwa in his book The Struggle for Land in Zimbabwe (1890 — 1980) which The Patriot is serialising.

IN Southern Rhodesia, the South African influence especially manifested itself in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of July 29 1918 which ruled that it recognised only European settler-individual title deeds to land when it asserted that:
“White settlement and the consolidation of the British influence were objects common to both Crown and Company.
Both desired to encourage white settlers generally to select and acquire land and, on compliance with the prescribed formalities, they were to become absolute owners of their holdings.” (Report of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of 29 July 1918)
In essence, the ruling converted the right of conquest to land into a human right to land and property for the white settlers, on all conquered lands in Zimbabwe.
In a South African apartheid-style move, immediately after the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council’s July 29 1918 ruling, Hebert Taylor, the Chief Native Commissioner of Southern Rhodesia, in his annual reports for the year 1919 and 1920, advocated the reservation of land, where possible, contiguous to existing ‘native reserves’ for acquisition by individual Africans. (Land Commission Report, p.3)
On May 18 1921, the reports were tabled in the Southern Rhodesia Legislative Council and a Council Resolution was passed which read:
“In the interest of all alike, it is not desirable that natives should acquire land indiscriminately owing to the inevitable friction which will arise with their European neighbours.” (Land Commission Report p.3).
A Southern Rhodesia delegation to London raised the same matter with the British Secretary of State, whose response was published in the Government Gazette extraordinary of January 19 1922 stating ‘that specific districts should be set aside by the High Commissioner in which natives alone might acquire land and within which Europeans should not be allowed to do so.’ (Land Commission Report, p.3)
This was subject to the amendment of Article 83 of the Southern Rhodesia Order-in-Council of 1898 which the Secretary of State described as ‘a long accepted principle’ only subject to amendment by an ‘Imperial Inquiry’ after the establishment of a Representative Government in 1923. (Land Commission Report, p.3)
The Magna Carta on Land in Southern Rhodesia
Article 83 of the Southern Rhodesia Order-in-Council of 1898 and Section 63 of the Southern Rhodesia Constitution of 1923 constituted a Magna Carta on land for white settlers in Southern Rhodesia.
Among other things, Article 83 of the Southern Rhodesia Order-in-Council of 1898 stated that:
“A native may acquire, hold, encumber and dispose of land on the same conditions as a person who is not a native.”
And, in the Southern Rhodesia Constitution of 1923, the ‘long accepted principle’ would be sustained by Section 63 which stated that:
“All Charters, Orders-in-Council, Ordinances, Proclamations and Laws … are enforced within the colony — until duly repealed or varied, … except in so far as the same are repugnant to these letters patent.”
In essence, the ‘Magna Carta’ (Article 83 of the Southern Rhodesia Order-in-Council of 1898) gave Africans rights equal to European settlers’ rights when purchasing land either from the 43 000 000 acres (or 17 200 000 hectares) of the ‘unalienated lands’ or ‘Crown Land’ or from the 31 000 000 acres (or 12 400 000 hectares) of European freehold farmland with title deeds.
More critically, it was an arrangement that threatened the segregatory objectives of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of July 29 1918 which had converted the right of conquest to land into a human right to land and property for the white settlers on all conquered lands in Zimbabwe, when it ruled that it recognised only white settler-individual title deeds to land.
The result was that on January 10 1925, the Governor of Southern Rhodesia ‘hurriedly’ appointed a Land Commission to save the racist objectives.
Morris Carter Land Commission
On the ground, it was actually the Africans living on unalienated ‘Crown Lands’ and ‘Private Locations’ on white settler-farms, mines and towns who were targeted and ‘precipitated’ the formation of the Morris Carter Land Commission of 1925. (Land Commission Report p.12.)
Judge William Morris Carter was nominated by the Imperial Government to chair the Land Commission.
The other commissioners were Hebert John Taylor, the Chief Native Commissioner and William John Atherstone, who was the director of the Department of Lands in Southern Rhodesia .
Morris Carter openly sympathised with white settlers who demanded segregration on land.
He was notorious in both Uganda and Tanganyika for his racist favouritism towards whites on the expropriation of fertile African lands by white settlers.
Atherstone openly admitted that he was serving on the Land Commission ‘to fully weigh the interests of European settlement.’ (Palmer 1977: p.162)
As for the Chief Native Commissioner, Herbert Taylor, it was him, after all, who had initiated and instigated the segregation policy on land in his reports of 1919, and 1920. (Land Commission Report p.3)
Terms of Reference for the Land Commission
The terms of reference for the Land Commission were clearly defined by the Governor of Southern Rhodesia who had appointed the Land Commission.
The Land Commission was to ‘enquire into and report upon the expediency and practicability of setting apart defined areas outside the boundaries of the native reserves’:
(a) Within which natives only shall be permitted to acquire ownership of or interest in land,
and
(b) Within which only Europeans shall be permitted to acquire ownership of or interest in land. (Land Commission of 1925 Report, p1).
African Evidence Before the Morris Carter Land Commission
The majority of the 1 753 Africans who were rounded up to give evidence to the Land Commission (Palmer, 1977: p.180) were chiefs, headmen and heads of kraals, who in general were extremely cowed down.
They gave evidence as a group. (Land Commission Report, p.2)
After defeat in the First Chimurenga, which was still fresh in their minds, they were not yet ready to confront their European conquerors and ventilate their genuine grievances on land, which had all but disappeared from their control.
They were quite aware that any dissenting voice from them, on land, would have attracted immediate and vicious attacks and arrest by white-settler authorities for ‘rebellion’.
Moreover, almost none of the African leaders understood the intentions and purpose of the Land Commission of 1925.
In fact, many of both Europeans and Africans were surprised to learn of the existence of equal rights to purchase land under Article 83 of the Order-in-Council of 1898 as enshrined under Section 63 of the Southern Rhodesia Constitution. (Palmer 1977: p.180)