Page:Satyagraha in South Africa.pdf/49

thousands and sold at a good profit. Naturally this trade was largely in the hands of Indians who had besides a fair share of the trade with Zulus. They thus became an eyesore to petty European traders. Again, some Englishmen pointed out to the Indian traders, that according to law they were entitled to vote in the elections for the Legislative Assembly of Natal, and to stand as candidates for the same. Some Indians therefore got their names entered on the electoral roll. This made the European politicians of Natal join the ranks of anti-Indians. They doubted whether the Europeans could stand in competition with Indians if the Indians’ prestige increased, and if their position was consolidated, in Natal. The first step, therefore, taken by the responsible Government of Natal in connection with free Indians was that they decided to enact a law, disfranchising all Asiatics save those who were then rightly contained in any voters’ list. A bill to that effect was first introduced into the Legislative Assembly of Natal in 1894. This was based on the principle of excluding Indians as Indians from the franchise, and was in Natal the first piece of legislation affecting them in which racial distinction was made. Indians resisted this measure. A memorial was prepared during one night and four hundred signatures were appended to it. When the memorial was submitted to the Legislative Assembly of Natal, that body was startled. But the bill was passed all the same. A memorial bearing ten thousand signatures was submitted to Lord Ripon who was then Secretary of State for the Colonies. Ten thousand signatures meant almost the total population at the time of free Indians in Natal. Lord Ripon disallowed the bill and declared that the British Empire could not agree to the establishment of a colour bar in legislation. The reader will be in a position later on to appreciate how great was this victory for Indians. The Natal Government, therefore, brought forward another bill, removing racial distinction but indirectly disqualifying Indians. Indians protested against this as well but without success. This new bill was ambiguous in meaning. Indians were in a position to carry it