1729 Jan Botma
In two separate, but remarkably similar, cases in 1729, Stellenbosch burghers were each found guilty of causing the death of one of their slaves by excessive punishment. Here we print the records from one of them.1 Jan Botma confessed to ordering the beating of his slave Joseph van Malabaar (the job was performed by other slaves), but the precise cause of Joseph’s death remained unclear. Much was made of the fact that he drank rain water from the ground after his beating – over-consumption of water when the body was heated after a beating was believed to be a cause of illness and possibly death.2 The surgeon reported that none of the wounds on Joseph’s body were ‘mortal’ and his verdict was death by drowning. The court nonetheless found Botma guilty of causing the death of his slave by excessive whipping, although he stated that he was not aware he had done any wrong. Unlike Jan de Thuilot, who was sentenced to death in 1708 for killing a slave (see case above), Botma was fined 100 rixdollars and ordered to pay costs.3 That he was not let off completely shows that the Company regarded maltreatment of slaves leading to death as a punishable offence.4
Footnotes
-
The other burgher was Jan Steenkamp, who claimed that he had only allowed his slave Hector to be whipped for ‘niet langer als een pijp tobacq rookens’ (no longer than it takes to smoke a pipe of tobacco). He was fined 50 rixdollars, CJ 11, ff. 49-50. See Schoeman 2004: 204-6 for a discussion of the Steenkamp case. ↩
-
See 1740 Daniel Lourich, n. 8 for evidence of this opinion. ↩
-
CJ 11, ff. 48-9. There is no sententie for this case. The eijscheijschLiterally ‘claim’ or ‘demand.’ This is strictly speaking the eijsch ende conclusie without the final part about sentencing, but the term is often used as a shorthand for the whole document. recommended that Botma be banished from the Cape for ten years as an example to others (CJ 333, f. 267), but this was not upheld by the court. The fiscal argued that Botma, as former heemraadheemraadThe origin of this word is uncertain, but is connected to the Dutch words heem (‘homestead’) and raad (‘councillor’). This was the title of a free burgher who served on the Collegie van Heemraden in the rural districts of the Cape, usually for a term of two years., should have known better. For comments on this case, see Biewenga 1999: 58. ↩
-
Only two years later, in 1731, a plakkaatplakkaatAn ordinance or decree of the Council of Policy read in public places and posted on buildings. The name is derived from the seal, a ‘placaat’, which was impressed on the document containing an ordinance. was issued against the maltreatment of slaves, which commented on recent cases in which owners had murdered their slaves, Kaapse Plakkaatboek II: 149-50. The immediate cause of this was a horrific case of sadistic abuse of a slave by his owner, Christiaan Gottlieb Opperman (Shell 1994: 208), but clearly the authorities also had cases like that of Jan Botma in mind. For discussion of punishment of owners for the murder of their slaves, see 1707 Jan de Thuilot. ↩
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, ff. 268-70.
Interrogation, on the requisition of the landdrost Pieter Lourensz, in which is to be heard and questioned the burgher Jan Botma.
There appears before us, the undersigned delegates from the honourable Council of Justice of this government, the burgher Jan Botma, who has answered to the questions below in such a way as is written next to each one.
Article 1: What is the prisoner’s, name, place of birth, and age?
Answer: Jan Botma, born at the Cape of Good Hope, 27 years old.
Article 2: Working as what here, and where resident?
Answer: As a farmer, and to live at Stellenbosch.
Article 3: If the prisoner, on the 8th of the past month June, had a certain slave, named Joseph, be undressed, tied up and then beaten?
Answer: Yes.
Article 4: For what reason the prisoner had this done?
Answer: Because this slave had torn the clothes from the body of a woman slave belonging to the prisoner and committed lots of violence, besides kicking and beating this woman slave.
Article 5: Where and by whom the prisoner had the said slave Joseph whipped, as also with what?
Answer: I had him tied onto a ladder and whipped thus with split canes.
Article 6: If this had been done at the prisoner’s farm, which is where he resides, and by his slaves Aaron and Domingo?
Answer: Yes.
Article 7: And also if this was performed with split canes on the prisoner’s order?
Answer: Yes.
Article 8: If the prisoner is also aware that the said slave Joseph had drunk water?
Answer: Yes, this slave drank water after he was whipped, and even to such an extent that the prisoner’s slaves, Aaron and Domingo, had to carry him away from the water hole.
Article 9: From what, and when, the said slave Joseph came to die?
Answer: I do not know from what the slave died, but he was found dead in the morning of the day after he had been whipped.
Article 10: If the prisoner must not admit that he is highly punishable because of the actions he committed?
Answer: I do not know to have offended by it, and if I had known to do wrong by it, I would not have done it. Also, had I not been unwell, I would have brought this slave to Stellenbosch that very same evening.
Thus questioned and answered in the Castle of Good Hope on 28 July 1729.
[signed] Jan Botma.
As delegates, [signed] Cl. Brand, Hendk. Oostwalt Eksteen.
In my presence, [signed] Js. de Grandpreez, secretary.
Verification
There appears before us, the undersigned delegates from the honourable Council of Justice of this government, the burgher Jan Botma, who, after the questions above with his answers to them had been read out word by word, clearly and plainly, declares to fully persist by it, therefore not desiring that anything be added to or taken away from it, except only that he had the slave Joseph beaten for about half an hour, with breaks in-between, during which to question him.
Thus verified in the Castle of Good Hope on 29 July 1729.
[signed] Jan Botma.
As delegates, [signed] Cl. Brand, Hendk. Oostwalt Eksteen.
In my presence, [signed] Js. de Grandpreez, secretary.
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, ff. 271r-v.
Statement given by Domingo van Goa, bondsman of the farmer Jan Botma, on the requisition of the landdrost Pieter Lourensz, namely:
That when the testifier came home around evening on the 8th of this current month June, his master, the aforementioned Jan Botma, ordered him to help whip with split canes a certain fellow slave, named Joseph van Malabaar (who was naked and bound to a ladder, and already being beaten by his master’s slave, Aaron).
That the testifier having done this for about half an hour, with breaks in-between, together with the aforementioned Aaron, untied the said slave Joseph on the order of his master. Which is when the same [Joseph] went to the kitchen, where he sat for a while, after which he went outside through the door and, up to two times, drank there from a pool of rain water.
That the testifier then saw the aforementioned slave Aaron taking the said Joseph away from the water and bringing him to his bed, where the same also came to die that night.
Thus done and related in the Dutch language, which the testifier understands and speaks very well, at Stellenbosch on 11 June 1729.
This X is the mark of the testifier, Domingo van Goa.
As witnesses, [signed] Hans Conterman, Johannis van Ellewe.
With my cognisance, [signed] P. Mazot, secretary.
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, ff. 272r-v.
Statement given by Aaron van Madagascar, bondsman of the farmer Jan Botma, on the requisition of the landdrost Pieter Lourensz, namely:
That the testifier’s master, the aforementioned Jan Botma, had ordered him on Wednesday, the 8th of this current month June, to remove the clothes of his fellow slave, named Joseph van Malabaar, next, to tie him onto a ladder, and to whip him thus on the bare back with split canes.
That when the testifier had been busy whipping for some time, his fellow slave, named Domingo, was likewise commanded by his master to whip the aforementioned slave Joseph with rods.
That the testifier with the aforesaid Domingo, after having beaten the aforementioned slave Joseph for about one hour, with some breaks in-between, untied the same on the order of his master. Which is when the aforementioned slave Joseph went into the kitchen and, after having sat there for a while, went outside through the door and drank there, up to two times, from a pool of rain water.
That the testifier, finding the aforementioned slave Joseph lying by the pool, picked him up and lay him down on his bed, which is where he also came to die that night.
Thus done and related in the Dutch language, which the testifier understands and speaks very well, at Stellenbosch on 11 June 1729.
This X is the mark of the testifier, Aaron van Madagascar.
As witnesses, [signed] Hans Conterman, Johannis van Ellewe.
With my cognisance, [signed] P. Mazot, secretary.
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, f. 274
I, the undersigned surgeon of Drakenstein, attest, on the requisition of the landdrost Pieter Lourensz, to have examined, on the 10th of this current month June and in the presence of the deputised heemradenheemradenThe origin of this word is uncertain, but is connected to the Dutch words heem (‘homestead’) and raad (‘councillor’). This was the title of a free burgher who served on the Collegie van Heemraden in the rural districts of the Cape, usually for a term of two years., on the farm of Jan Botma a certain dead slave, named Joseph, belonging to the aforesaid Botma, and to have found that the same was whipped, although unable to find any mortal wounds on the same, but presumes that this jongenjongenLiterally ‘boy.’ In Dutch it was common to use this word also to refer to male servants, irrespective of age. At the Cape, however, this usage was extended to slaves and then became exclusive, so that jongen (also in the deflected form jong) came to mean ‘male slave’, such that Afrikaans lost the use of the word to mean ‘boy’ and instead uses seun (from Dutch zoon) for both ‘boy’ and ‘son.’ In this primary meaning, the word has become obsolete in modern Afrikaans, except for the archaic terms tuinjong (‘garden boy’) and plaasjong (‘farm boy’), in the sense of male workers of colour. Joseph must have drowned in the water, seeing that, when he had turned the same over, water ran from his mouth.
All of which I offer, if necessary, to confirm subsequently.
Stellenbosch, 20 June 1729,
[signed] Js. Cl. Schabort.
Interrogatoriën, omme daarop, ter requisitie van den landdrost Pieter Lourensz, gehoord en ondervraagt te werden, den burger Jan Botma.
Compareerde voor ons, ondergetekende gecommitteerdens uijt den edelagtbare Raad van Justitie deses gouvernements, den burger Jan Botma, dewelke op de onderstaande vraagen sodanig heeft geantwoord als ter zijde van een ijder staat geschreven.
Articul 1: Hoe zijn gevangens naam, geboorteplaats en ouderdom is.
Antwoord: Jan Botma, geboortig van Cabo de Goede Hoop, oud 27 jaaren.
Articul 2: Waar voor alhier bescheijden, en waar woonagtig is?
Antwoord: Landbouwer te sijn, en te woonen aan Stellenbosch.
Articul 3: Off hij gevangen niet seekeren slaaf, genaamt Joseph, op den 8e der jongst gepasseerde maand Junij, heeft doen uijttrekken, vastbinden en vervolgens laaten geesselen?
Antwoord: Ja.
Articul 4: Om welke reedenen hij gevangen sulx heeft laaten doen?
Antwoord: Omdat die slaaf de kleederen van een slavin van hem gevangen van ’t lijf hadde afgescheurt en groot geweld gemaakt, mitsgaders ook die slavin getrapt en geslaagen.
Articul 5: Waar, en door wien, hij gevangen gemelte slaaff Joseph heeft laaten geesselen, alsook waarmeede?
Antwoord: Ik heb hem op een leer laaten vastbinden en dus met gespleete rottangs geesselen.
Articul 6: Off sulx niet op zijn gevangens hoffsteede, waar woonagtigh is, en door zijn gevangens slaven Aaron en Domingo, heeft laaten doen?
Antwoord: Ja.
Articul 7: En off sulx ook niet verrigt is op zijn gevangens ordre met gespleete rottangs?
Antwoord: Ja.
Articul 8: Off hem gevangen ook bewust is dat gezegde slaaff Joseph waater heeft gedronken?
Antwoord: Ja, die slaaf heeft water gedronken nadat gegeeselt was geworden, en wel sodanig dat des gevangens slaaven Aaron en Domingo hem van de watercuijl hebben moeten wegdragen.
Articul 9: Waarvan, en wanneer even gemelte slaaff Joseph is koomen te sterven?
Antwoord: Ik weet niet waaraan die slaaf is gestorven, dog hij is daags nadat gegeesselt was geworden, des morgens dood gevonden.
Articul 10: Off hij gevangen niet moet bekennen dat over zijne begaane handelinge ten hoogsten straffbaar is?
Antwoord: Ik weet niet daaraan misdaan te hebben, en hadde ik geweeten daaraan quaalijk te doen, ik soude ’t niet hebben gedaan. Was ik ook niet siekelijk geweest, ik soude die slaaf de eijgensten avond aan Stellenbosch gebragt hebben.
Aldus gevraagt ende beantwoord in ’t Casteel de Goede Hoop, den 28 Julij 1729.
[get.] Jan Botma.
Als gecommitteerdens, [get.] Cl. Brand, Hendk. Oostwalt Eksteen.
Mij present, [get.] Js. de Grandpreez, secretaris.
Recollement
Compareerde voor ons, ondergetekende gecommitteerdens uijt den edelagtbare Raad van Justitie deses gouvernements, den burger Jan Botma, dewelke de bovenstaande vraagen met sijn daarop gegevene antwoorden van woord tot woord klaar en duijdelijk voorgelesen sijnde, verclaarde daarbij volkomen te persisteeren, niet begeerende oversulx datter iets meer bijgevoegt ofte van gedaan werden sal, als alleenig dat hij gevraagde die slaaf Joseph omtrent een half uure met tusschenpoosinge heeft laten slaan, om hem ondertusschen te ondervraagen.
Aldus gerecolleert in ’t Casteel de Goede Hoop, den 29e Julij 1729.
[get.] Jan Botma.
Als gecommitts., [get.] Cl. Brand, Hendk. Oostwalt Eksteen.
Mij present, [get.] Js. de Grandpreez, secretaris.
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, ff. 271r-v.
Relaas gedaan door Domingo van Goa, lijffeigen van den landtbouwer Jan Botma, ter requisitie van den Landdrost Pieter Lourensz., naamentlijk:
Dat hij relateur op Woensdag den 8e deeser loopende maand Junij, omtrent den avondt, t’ huis koomende, sijn meester Jan Botma, voormelt, hem relateur gelast heeft seekere sijne meede slaaf, genaamt Joseph van Malabaar (die naakt op een ladder gebonden was, en bereets door sijn meesters slaaf Aaron was geslaagen), met gespleete rottingen te helpen geesselen.
Dat hij relateur sulcs, benevens den voormelte Aaron, omtrent een half uur met tusschenpoosingen verrigt hebbende, op ordre van sijn relateurs meester, gemelte slaaf Joseph hebben losgebonden, als wanneer denselve in de combuis is gegaen, alwaar eenigen tijdt geseten hebbende, buiten de deure is gegaen en aldaar uit een kuil regenwater tot twee maalen heeft gedronken.
Dat hij relateur alsdoen heeft gesien dat voormelte slaaf Aaron den dickwils genoemde Joseph van dat water heeft weggenoomen en op desselfs kooij gebragt, alwaar denselven ook dien nagt daaraan is koomen te sterven.
Aldus gedaan en gerelateert in de Nederduitsche taale, die den relateur seer wel verstaat en spreekt, op Stellenbosch, den 11 Junij 1729.
Dit X is ’t merk van den relateur, Domingo van Goa.
Als getuigen, [get.] Hans Conterman, Johannis van Ellewe.
In kennisse van mij, [get.] P. Mazot, secretaris.
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, ff. 272r-v.
Relaas gedaan door Aaron van Madagascar, lijffeijgen van den landbouwer Jan Botma, ter requisitie van den landdrost Pieter Lourensz., namentlijk:
Dat sijn relateurs meester Jan Botma, voornoemt, op Woensdagh den aghsten deeser loopende maand Junij, hem gelast heeft sijn relateurs meede slaaf, genaemt Joseph van Malabaar de kleederen uit te trecken, vervolgens op een ladder te binden, en alsoo met gespleete rottings op de bloote rugge te geesselen.
Dat hij relateur eenigen tijdt met geesselen beesig geweest zijnde, sijn relateurs meede slaaf, genaamt Domingo insgelijks door sijn meester is gecommandeert geworden den voormelde slaaf Joseph met roeden te geesselen.
Dat hij relateur, beneevens voorseijde Domingo, naer dat dickwils genoemde slaaf Joseph omtrent een uur met eenige tusschenpoosingen hadden geslaagen, op ordre van sijn relateurs voorseijde meester denselven hebben losgemaekt, als wanneer meergemelte slaaf Joseph in de combuis is gegaan, alwaar eenigen tijdt geseeten hebbende, is buiten de deure gegaen, en aldaar uit een kuil reegenwaater tot twee maalen heeft gedronken.
Dat hij relateur voormelde slaaf Joseph bij die kuil leggen vindende, denselven heeft opgenoomen en op sijn kooij gelegt, alwaar ook die naght daaraan is komen te sterven.
Aldus gedaan en gerelateert in de Nederduitsche taale, die de relateur seer wel verstaat en spreekt, op Stellenbosch, den 11e Junij 1729.
Dit X is ’t merk van den relateur, Aaron van Madagascar.
Als getuigen, [get.] Hans Conterman, Johannis van Ellewe.
In kennisse van mij, [get.] P. Mazot, secretaris.
CJ 333 Criminele Process Stukken, 1729, f. 274.
Ik, ondergeteekende chirurgijn aan Drakensteijn, attesteere, ter requisitie van den landdrost Pieter Lourensz., dat op den 10e deeser loopende maand Junij, ten overstaan van gecommitteerde heemraden, hebben gevisiteert op de plaats van Jan Botma, zeekere doode slaaff, genaamt Joseph, toebehoorende voorseijde Botma, en bevonden dat deselve waar gegeesselt, dogh geen dood wonden aan denselven bevonden, maar presumeeren dat dien jongen Joseph naar de geesselingh door ’t water moet zijn gesmoort, aangesien denselven het waater, wanneer omgekeert wierd, uijt de mond liep.
Alle ’twelke presenteere, desnoods, nader te bekragtigen.
Stellenbosch, den 20e Junij 1729.
[get.] Js. Cl. Schabort.