March 21, 1960

Massacre at Sharpeville

Bishop Reeves was an Angli-
can priest in South Africa from
1949 to 1960. During the latter
part of his service in South Af-
rica, he was Bishop of Johan-
nesburg. An outspoken oppon-
ent of apartheid, he was active
in arranging legal defence and
relief for political prisoners and
their families in South Africa.
He organized relief for the fami-
lies of those killed and wound-
ed in the Sharpeville incident
and arranged for an investiga-
tion of the incident. Shortly
thereafter, he was _ deported
from South Africa.

His article appeared in a Bri-
tish magazine and is published
below in abridged form.

March 21, 1970, will mark the
10th anniversary of the mass-
cre of Sharpeville, when South
African police opened fire on
several thousand demonstrators
protesting against the law re-
quiring Africans to carry passes
at all times. On that day — 21
March 1960 — 69 persons, in-
cluding eight women and 10
children, were killed and 180
wounded.

Subsequently, the United Na-
tions General Assembly pro-
claimed 21 March annually as
the “International Day for the
Elimination of Racial Discrimin-
ation 4.

Events at Sharpeville on 21
March 1960. shocked the, world
and are still remembered with
shame by civilized men every-
where. Early that morning a
crowd of Africans estimated at
between 5,000 and 7,000 march-
ed through Sharpeville to the
municipal offices. It appears
that earlier that day people were
urged to take part in this de-
monstration. However, many
Africans joined the procession
to the municipal offices quite
willingly.> Eventually this  de-
monstration was dispersed by
the police, using tear-gas bombs
and then a baton charge. For-
tunately nobody was hurt.
“Reading from the police re-
port on what subseauently hap-
pened, the Prime Minister told
the House of Assembly that
evening that the police estima-
ted 20,000 people were in the
crowd. This seems to have been
a serious exaggeration. From
photographs taken at the time
it is doubtful if there were ever
more than 5,000 present’ at any
particular moment. They were
drawn to the crowd by a variety
of reasons. Some wanted to pro-
test against the pass laws; some
were there out of idle curiosity;

some had heard that a state- .

ment would be made about
passes.

The scene was set. Anvone
who has lived in South Africa
knows how explosive that situa-
tion had alreadv become: On the
one side was the ever-growing
crowd of Africans. On the other
side was the South African po-
lice. Everv African fears them,
whether they are traffic police,
ordinary constables or members
of the dreaded Special Branch.
Most policemen expect unques-
tioning deference from Africans.

During this time Colonel
Spengler, then head of the Spe-
cial Branch. was arresting three
African leaders. He said subse-
quently that he was able to

carry out his arrest because the.

crowd was not in a_ violent

mood.

It is extremely difficult to
know what happened next.
Some of the crowd near the
gate of the Police Station com-
pound said later that they heard
a shot. Some said that that they

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MARCH 20, 1970—Page ae

beware of the label

heard a policeman say, “Fire”.
Others suddenly became aware
that the police were firing in
their midst. But all agreed that
nearly everyone turned and ran
away once they realized what
was happening. Colonel Pienaar
assegted that he did not give the
order to fire. Moreover, he. de-
clared that he would not have
fired in that situation. It was
stated later that two white po-
licemen opened fire and about
50 others followed suit, using
service revolvers, rifles and sten
guns.

Whatever doubts there may
be of the sequence of events in
those fateful minutes, there can
be no argument over the devas-
tating consequences of the ac-
tion of the police on 21 March
1960 in Sharpeville. Sixty-nine
people were killed. including

eight women and 10 children,
and 180 wounded including 31
women and 19 children.

According to medical evi-
dence the police continued firing
after the people began to flee,
for while 30 shots had entered
the wounded or killed from the
front of their bodies no less
than 155 bullets had entered the
bodies of the injured and killed
from their backs. All this hap-
pened in 40 seconds, when 705
rounds were fired from revol-
vers and sten guns. But what-
ever weapons were used the
massacre was horrible.,

Later, 77 Africans were ar-
rested in connection with the
Sharpeville demonstration in
some cases while they were still
in hospital: In fact, it was clear
on my visits to the wards of
Baragwaneth Hospital that
many of the injured feared what
would happen to them when
they left hospital.

Certainly the Government of
South Africa, though badly sha-
ken in the days immediately fol-
lowing Sharpeville, soon regain-
ed control of the situation. On
24 March 1960, the Government
banned all public meetings in
24 Magisterial districts. On 18
April, the Governor - General
signed a proclamation banning
the African National Congress
and the Pan Africanist Congress
as unlawful organizations. On
30 March, in Proclamation No.
90, the Governor-General de-
clared a state of emergency
which lasted until 31 August
1960. During that time a large
number of prominent opponents
of Government policy of all
races were arrested and detained
without trial. In addition some
20,000 Africans were rounded
up, many of whom were releas-
ed after screening.

After some months, at least
superficially, life became at
least relatively normal. But un-
derneath the external calm dan-
gerous fires continue to smoul-
der: fires, that can never be
extinguished by repressive mea-
sures coupled with a constant
and growing show of force.

on Toronto stage

The grotesque conspiracy

’ trial and sentencing of the Chi-

cago Seven ended only a few
weeks ago and now, before the
enormity of the events has quite
sunk in, Toronto:* Workshop
Productions, at 12 Alexander,
presents Chicago ’70, “a theatri-
cal documentary,’ based on the
trial transcripts and the actual
words of judge, prosecutor, de-
fense, mayor, poets, folk-singers
and the accused themselves.

But this is no mere mock
trial. Chicago ’70 is an exciting
stage work both in conception
and performance. Devised, im-
provised and written by TWP’s
director, George Luscombe, to-
gether with his acting company,
designed in metallic decor and
constumed in Mad Hatter ec-
centricity by Nancy Jowsey,
with lighting effects by John
Faulkner, the show is a theatri-
cal production of high artistry
and impassioned. inspiration.

Here is more than the Demo-
cratic National Convention jug-
gernaut,. more than the: fat-cat
Mayor Daley, more than the
babbitry of an LBJ or a Hum-
phrey, more than the hooligan-
ism of the rioting Chicago
police. Here is the bludgeoning
of students and young workers,
of reporters and TV newsmen.
Here is the arrest of the victims
and their farcical trial in a
courtroom straight out of
Moliere plus Daumier plus Kaf-
ka. And more, here under a
merciless spotlight is the dirty
scandal of U.S. capitalism, a
violent society that eats its own
young.

And more, here is the very
essence of the purpose of art—
to relate to life. Here is TWP
at its inspired best. For this is
its forte—to improvise, to in-
vent, to embellish, to seek out
realtiy, to enrich through fan-
tasy, to anger, to involve and to
inspire.

For TWP is at its vibrant best
when it melds its talents—sing-

‘justice _ of

sfact

OFF BALANCE! —

spear

ing, dancing, chanting,

ing, forming fluid tableaus, ™
ming or just standing still—e™
ploying the many theatre 4!
to create a vital unity, to @€
ver an idea, to sink home #
punch. a

Chicago ’70 is a furious *
tire, a caricature, a —
a circus of color, costumé
movement and sound, a macé)
bre flippancy, a nightmare eI
folly, interrupted again
again by flashes of illuminalldl
in scenes from Lewis Carroll
Alice in Wonderland, repeat”
ly turning the evil Chicago
tasmagoria into an absurd
joke. But the inspired hum
and the comic inventiven® *
which expose the fanatical ™
court, judge
state, while shocking, just ™
the ultimate horror, the psy
tic, sadistic brutality 0
venal men in power.

chor

But Chicago ’70 indicts im a

own way and it is also acute
aware of Canada’s involvemel
of our role in developing ® 5,
gases at Suffield, of the a
in Canadian life, oF ell
American challenge,
the Arctic waters!”

A recurring scene is the us
army man issuing an order \
Vietnamese, Indians, Eskim
other Canadians who fail 4)
grasp the U.S. imperial visi"
and snapping, “They're all Sin)
pid—they’ll understand
and shooting them down.

Parallel to this is the al
judge’s reiterated stylized
cantation, “Objection sustt
ed!” whenever the prosecl™
objects. :

The production is one of ua)
most colorful and inspired ool
mounted by TWP. Highliey
are the “indications” a,
game, the strobe-light pal
the male fashion show,
blackboard graffiti, the
jockey’s comments
song, “One, two, three,
what are we fighting - fo

dish
the

1?”
‘ salt
The actors, playing multi
roles, are in their best fort
many months, speaking ann
lately and with impact, ac
concisely and with variety: —

Variously and interchane,
ably interpreting the judg® ioh
fense lawyers, the prosecul ij
court officials, defendants
others are Peter Fautknel te"
Wheland, Jim Lawrence, vil)
en Bush, Rick McKenna, i ell
Butler, Carol Carrington, fet
Walsh and Francois Kia
Mel Dixon, as the shae ft
Bobby Seale, protests elod¥
ly but limits our sympathy, ial!
lack of vocal balance. ont
Grant, as  schoolmarm, 5

ef cf

woman jury and Wont
Alice, registers strongly
role. .
0%
Chicago ’70 is one of ant
stage works ‘iat lifts the jie?
man _ spirit.
has hurled » defiance ull
King of He..ts and his C0)
“You're nothing but a P@. fof
cards!” the show ends a? call
the first time that } cam : ex”
a TWP auditor.um virtually a0
plodes in a hig..y-charge
tional outburst. And thea itf
me, is genuine audien®
volvement. ‘

‘ }
Martin sm

crm™ OQ

f the

artly after | ge

§
i t

PA A tS AE el pe ea aes Pes fe,