1793 Lindor van Mallebaar

Details
Name on Document:
Lindor van Mallebaar
Date:
1793-07-20
Document Type:
Statement
Primary Charge:
affair
Secondary Charge:
--
Tag(s):
intimate relationship (2)slave and burgher relationship (1)slaves supporting law (4)
Summary

Sexual contacts between slaves and their owners were viewed with disfavour by the authorities, and sometimes, as in this case, by other slaves as well.1 The 26-year-old Lindor van Mallebaar was reported to his owner by a fellow slave who saw him with the 22-year-old daughter of his owner in highly compromising circumstances. Although Lindor avoided the death penalty by his claim that it was her incitement that led to the incident, he was sentenced to life on Robben Island for his actions.2

Footnotes

  1. For a discussion of sexual relations between colonist women and their slaves, see Upham 2001a. ↩

  2. The documentation in this case includes 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., the testimony of Jephta van Batavia, which was a copy of that transcribed here, the interrogation of Lindor van Mallebaar (who is referred to in the index as Lindor van Bengalen, either a clerical error or an indication of the fluidity of slave toponyms), CJ 447, ff. 491-507 as well as a sententie, CJ 796, ff. 267-72. Lindor stated in his interrogation that Mietjie had come and sat on his lap of her own accord and that he had pushed her off but that she persisted. He confessed that he had twice had sexual contact with her, on her intitiative, CJ 447, ff. 504-6, articles 7-15. The case was brought to the Council of Justice on 12 September 1793 when Lindor responded to the charge by saying ‘het is de nonje haar schuld’ (it was the nonjenonjeThis word entered Dutch from Malay nyonya (which in turn derived from Portuguese dona, ‘lady’) and was in use at the Cape since its foundation. It was used both by settlers to refer to women in general, and by slaves and Khoikhoi as a form of address for female Europeans. It survived in modern Afrikaans in the form of nooi or nôi, ‘young (unmarried) woman’, although it is now somewhat archaic.’s fault), CJ 75, f. 195. The case was held over for consideration until 7 October, when Lindor was sentenced to be placed under the gallows with a rope around his neck, then to be whipped and branded and to work in chains on Robben Island for life, CJ 75, ff. 194-95 and 209-10. This was a mitigation of the recommendation of 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. that Lindor should be hanged (CJ 447, f. 496); it appears that Lindor had succeeded in persuading the court that the episode was not entirely his fault. ↩

1/STB 3/12 Criminele Verklaringen, 1786-1793, unpaginated.
Translation Dutch

There appears before the undersigned 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., the honourables Dirk Wouter Hofman and Jacob Eksteen, Jephta van Batavia, bondsman of the former chief surgeon of the honourable Company’s hospital at the Cape, the honourable Pieter Domus,1 who declares, on the requisition of the landdrost here, the honourable Hendrik Lodewijk Bletterman, it to be true:

That fourteen days before yesterday, the deponent was ordered by his owner, shortly before the same repaired to bed in the afternoon, to have his fellow slaves Lindor van Mallebaar and Galant van Bougies spit a certain piece of land in the garden. That since, after waiting for half an hour, the aforementioned Lindor had not come to the garden, the deponent went to the kitchen and looked through the window to see whether or not the aforementioned Lindor was in there.

That the deponent saw the aforementioned Lindor, having the innocent daughter of his owner, named Mietjie, sitting backwards on his lap. The deponent called out to him: What are you doing with the nonjenonjeThis word entered Dutch from Malay nyonya (which in turn derived from Portuguese dona, ‘lady’) and was in use at the Cape since its foundation. It was used both by settlers to refer to women in general, and by slaves and Khoikhoi as a form of address for female Europeans. It survived in modern Afrikaans in the form of nooi or nôi, ‘young (unmarried) woman’, although it is now somewhat archaic. on your lap? Upon which the aforementioned Lindor instantly stood up, and when the deponent went from the window and entered the kitchen through the door, he found the aforementioned Lindor busy doing up his trousers.

That the deponent thereupon immediately went to the bedroom of his owner and found him in the galderijgalderijNot a ‘gallery,’ but usually a family room behind the public front rooms of a house where families ate together or where domestic chores were performed. In some earlier Cape houses it referred to a passageway or linking area between the front room and the kitchen area., to whom the deponent, out of scruple and also because he did not wish to hurt his owner’s feelings, only reported to have found Lindor with the aforementioned daughter of his owner, and that when he had called out: “What are you doing with nonjenonjeThis word entered Dutch from Malay nyonya (which in turn derived from Portuguese dona, ‘lady’) and was in use at the Cape since its foundation. It was used both by settlers to refer to women in general, and by slaves and Khoikhoi as a form of address for female Europeans. It survived in modern Afrikaans in the form of nooi or nôi, ‘young (unmarried) woman’, although it is now somewhat archaic.?”, the same had stood up, but not that the deponent, upon entering the kitchen door, had seen the aforementioned Lindor doing up his trousers. Likewise, for the same reason as above, the deponent similarly did not inform the petitioner of the latter when he enquired about this incident.

There being nothing more to declare, the deponent asserts to be convinced of the accuracy of his statement as in the text, declaring it to be the whole truth.

Thus recorded at the secretary’s office in Stellenbosch on 20 July 1793.

This mark X was set down by the deponent with his own hand.

As delegates, [signed] D.W. Hoffman, J. Eksteen.

In my presence, [signed] J.P. Faure, secretary.

Footnotes

  1. On whom see 1791 Baatjoe, n. 4. ↩

Compareerde voor de ondergeteekende gecommitteerde heemraaden, de edele Dirk Wouter Hofman en Jacob Eksteen, Jephta van Batavia, lijfeijgen van den oud oppermeester van ’s edele Compagnies hospitaal aan Cabo, de edele Pieter Domus, dewelken, ter requisitie van den landdrost alhier, de heer Hendrik Lodewijk Bletterman, verklaarde hoe waar is:

Dat den comparant, gisteren veerthien dagen voorleeden, door zijn lijfheer, eeven voordat denzelven zig des namiddags te bed begeven had, gelast zijnde om door des comparant meede slaven Lindor van Mallebaar en Galant van Bougies zeeker strookje gronds in den thuijn om te doen werken, den comparant, vermits na een half uur wagtens voormelde Lindor niet in den thuijn gekomen was, zig naar de keuken begeven en door het vengster gezien had off voormelde Lindor zig aldaar bevonden.

Dat den comparant voormelde Lindor gewaar geworden zijnde, hebbende de innocente dogter van des comparants lijfheer, Mietje genaamt, agterwaards op zijn schoot zitten, den comparant denzelven had toegeroepen: Wat doet jij met nonje op de schoot? Als wanneer voormelde Lindor terstond opgestaan was, en den comparant, van voor het vengster de keukendeur ingegaan zijnde, voormelde Lindor aangetroffen had bezig te zijn zijn broek digt te maken.

Dat den comparant ogenblikkelijk hierop naar het slaapvertrek van zijn comparants lijfheer zig hebbende begeven, denzelven in de gaandereij had aangetroffen, aan denwelken den comparant, uit schroom, zoowel als om zijn comparants lijfheer geen hartenleed aan te doen, slegts gezegt heevt voormelde Lindor wel aangetroffen te hebben met de voormelde dogter van des comparants lijfheer, en dat denzelven, op het toeroepen van den comparant: Wat doet jij met nonje?, was opgestaan, dog niet dat den comparant, de keukendeur ingegaan zijnde, gezien had voormelde Lindor zijn broek toe te maken; gelijk den comparant wanneer den requirant na het voorzeijde geval zig bij hem geïnformeert had, insgelijks om de bovengenoemde reeden het laatste ook niet aan den requirant hadt bekend gemaakt.

Niets meer verklarende, geevt den comparant voor reedenen van wetenschap als in den text, betuijgende hetzelve d’ suijvere waarheijd te zijn.

Dat aldus passeerde ter secretarije aan Stellenbosch, den 20e Julij 1793.

Dit kruijsmerk X is door de comparant eigenhandig gesteld.

Als gecommitteerdens, [get.] D.W. Hoffman, J. Eksteen.

Mij present, [get.] J.P. Faure, secretaris.