Tubal Uriah Butler of Trinidad and Tobago Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana: The Road to Independence

By Daurius Figueira

This work explodes myths on the decolonization process in former British colonies of Trinidad and Tobago and Ghana. Myths that masked the fact that the British colonial overlord with the full support of their local lackeys stage managed the process to ensure that compliant regimes were put in place as the inheritors of Independence from the British. Tubal Uriah Butler was systematically destroyed as a political leader to end his threat to the political order as he was not of the required material to be an inheritor of Independence. Kwame Nkrumah was fit to rule Ghana but he was subsequently removed in 1966. The social orders of Trinidad and Tobago and Ghana have been deeply impacted by British machinations on the road to Independence to this day.

• Language: English
• Publisher: iUniverse
• Release date: Jul 2, 2007
• ISBN: 9780595901609

Daurius Figueira

Daurius Figueira is a social researcher and is presently a lecturer at the University of the West Indies. He has previously published 11 books with the most recent being "Cocaine Trafficking in the Caribbean and West Africa in the Era of the Mexican cartels".

Book preview

Copyright © 2007 by Daurius Figueira

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

iUniverse books may be ordered through booksellers or by contacting:

iUniverse

2021 Pine Lake Road, Suite 100

Lincoln, NE 68512

www.iuniverse.com

1-800-Authors (1-800-288-4677)

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any Web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid.

The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

ISBN: 978-0-595-45858-5 (pbk)

ISBN: 978-0-595-90160-9 (ebk)

Printed in the United States of America

Contents

Acknowledgements

1 Butler’s Discourse 1937

2 Butler’s praxis towards the New Jerusalem

3 Butler in the Legislative Council 1950-56

4 Butler’s Exit 1956-1961

5 Butler through the eyes of others

6 Butler: The De-Classified Files

7 A Deconstruction of the Political Thought of Kwame Nkrumah

Bibliography

This book is dedicated to Surendranath Capildeo, Dr. Hamid Ghany, Christine Thomas, Prof. Onwubiko Agozino, The Staff at UWI St. Augustine Main Library and to My Wife and Son.

Acknowledgements 

I wish to thank the staff of Metropolitan Book Suppliers Ltd. Ishmael M. Khan Bookstores, the UWI Bookshop, the staff of TT Post for their kind assistance, and all other persons who have in any way contributed to the completion of this work.

1

Butler’s Discourse 1937 

Tubal Uriah Butler is hailed as a National Hero of Trinbago yet the salient constructs of Butler’s discourse remain either silenced in the dearth of texts created by Butler that were saved for posterity, or lost to the people of Trinbago simply because we refused to give voice to him after 1962 to balance the unrelenting assault by the British colonial overlord to render his text voiceless before 1962.

This work is then an attempt to unearth and deconstruct Butler’s discourse as contained in specific texts. These texts are as follows:

(a) Butler vs The King edited by W. Richard Jacobs 1976,

(b) The Debates of the Legislative Council of the Colony of Trinidad and Tobago from 1950 to 1961.

(c) The organ of the Butlerite Movement: The People.

(d) The declassified files of the British colonial overlord.

Butler vs The King’ (Jacobs 1976) would supply for deconstruction texts preceding his sedition trial in 1937, predominantly correspondence between Butler and various personages. The major speech that is forthcoming from Butler vs The King" is the speech he made in his defence from the witness box on the 9th December 1937 during his trial for sedition.

BUTLER’S CORRESPONDENCE

By way of letter dated the 27th July 1936 to the Acting Governor, Butler indicated the formation of a political party under his leadership named The British Empire Workers and Citizens Home Rule Party (B.E.W.C.H.R.P.)

The resolution passed by the B.E.W.C.H.R.P and attached to the letter to the Acting Governor embraces a salient discursive construct of Butler. He expresses it this way:

Whereas the Workers and citizens of the British Empire are in theory guaranteed justice and fairplay by the British Constitution, and whereas in practice justice and fairplay are not enjoyed by coloured workers and citizens of the Empire in these parts. And whereas it is desirable that the Gentlemen responsible for the administration of this portion of the Empire so discriminated against, be duly informed that the Natives being British to the core brook no further undue delay in his (and Empire) recognition of their Rights to equality of Conditions and Equality of Opportunities for existence for themselves and their children with their white fellow citizens in their country.

(Jacobs 1976 Pages 206 and 207)

Butler is then insisting on the following:

(a) That the non-white colonized peoples of the British Crown Colony of Trinidad and Tobago are in fact free citizens of the British Empire. The racial discrimination meted out to non-white citizens of the British colony of Trinidad and Tobago must now cease.

(b) The British Constitution guarantees in theory justice and fairplay for the natives are British to the core.

(c) That it is the administration of the British Empire in the Caribbean and Trinidad and Tobago who resolutely refuse to recognise the fact that the natives are in fact British to the core and are therefore standing in the way of the movement by the natives to have their rights duly recognised.

Butler’s discourse is then positing the end of discrimination against non-white colonized peoples of Trinidad and Tobago by first recognizing oneself as British and worthy of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the British constitution and granted to the white people of the colony of Trinidad and Tobago.

Butler presents the colonial administration as the obstacle, the stumbling block that stands in the way of the liberation of the non-white peoples of the colony. The granting of the rights and freedoms of the British Constitution only to the white peoples of the colony proves the fact that the colonial administrators are racist perpetrators of all that keeps non-white people from realizing their true potential. An action on the part of the racist colonial administrators that contravenes the principles of the British constitution. In a letter to the Acting Colonial Secretary for Trinidad and Tobago dated the 13th August 1936, Butler would label the actions of racist colonial administrators: British Unconstitutionalism in Men and Matters everywhere under the Old Flag (Jacobs 1976 Page 19).

In another letter to the Acting Governor dated the 4th September 1936 Butler expands his discursive concept of British un-constitutionalism. Butler states:

I am also to inform you that at the discussion much regret was expressed and much umbrage taken at what is, rightly or wrongly, considered Your Excellency’s contribution to the already existing Fascist-Imperialist-Capitalist policy of spreading discontent, disaffection and disloyalty amongst certain classes of loyal, law abiding British citizens living under the Old Flag in misery and want.

(Jacobs 1976 Page 211)

For Butler, British un-constitutionalism as articulated by the officials of the colonial administration in Trinidad and Tobago possessed specific characteristics of being fascist, imperialist and capitalist. More so the acting Governor was in fact an operative of this fascist-imperialist-capitalist system of British un-constitutionalism.

The direct result of the said policy was spreading discontent, disaffection and disloyalty amongst specific sections of the loyal, law abiding British citizens of the colony. The acting Governor and his colonial administration were for Butler fascist fifth columnists bent on destroying the integrity of the British Empire in Trinidad and Tobago. In the letter Butler continues:

In conclusion I am to inform you that the prevailing Spirit of the vast majority of your Fellow-Citizens of the great Empire of the Working-classes in Trinidad and Tobago brook no further delay on the part of government in instituting British Constitutional Measures to remove for all time the fascist" touch or taint in the General Life of Our Country and Empire which we at least see and deplore. ... do not tempt us to be disloyal. ... so do not tempt us to become lawbreakers! We want bread and full equality with all our fellow Britishers. Great wide power are today ours for any use against fascism and British un-constitutionalism.

(Jacobs 1976 Pages 211-212)

Butler lays down the gauntlet for the British Colonial administration by insisting that the potential of lawbreaking exists as a direct result of fascist oppression of the working class citizens of the British Empire in Trinidad and Tobago. British un-constitutionalism and its fascist policies must be ever cognizant of the power that can be wielded by the victims of British un-constitutionalism.

It is clearly apparent that Butler’s discourse demonised the colonial ruling elite by insisting that British colonial rule in Trinidad and Tobago was in itself ultra vires the British constitution. British colonial administration could not then have been genuine British constitutional rule; it had then to be fascist rule, British unconstitutional rule.

The natives of the colony who were then British to the core were charged with the task of assaulting and removing fascist, British unconstitutional rule thereby releasing liberating progressive British constitutional rule.

The native British masses of the colony would in 1937 strike a blow of international significance for it would be a blow for British constitutionalism against the alternate fascist world order in 1937. Butler in 1937 was therefore not calling for self-determination for the natives of the colony.

The liberation, the progress of the natives of the colony lay in being British to the core, anti-fascist, and anti-un-constitutionalism. Butler was then walking a discursive tightrope for he risked the wrath of the colonial overlord with no hint of liberation or progress for the natives he insisted on being their Chief Servant.

Butler wrote the governor of the colony on the 6th October 1936 making 13 demands of him. Demand number 11 states as follows:

That the present Unconstitutional position of Your Government be immediately remedied to retrieve what my party considers the honour of Our Country and Empire now lying in Fascist-Papist hands.

(Jacobs 1976 Page24)

Butler now introduces into his discourse an assault on Roman Catholicism and its fascist nature. Butler is demonising Roman Catholicism in a colony in which the Roman Catholic Church stood as a bastion of conservatism and bulwark of the French Creole elite.

Butler would insist that the alliance of Fascists and papists was an inherent threat to the protestant British Empire and the faithful, loyal protestant native citizens of the British Empire in Trinidad and Tobago. Butler in a letter dated the 21st June 1937 would utilise the said discursive construct as follows:

I am to add, Sir, that Protestants, Constitutionalists, and Anti-Papists-Fascists as the leaders of this movement are, we shall be forced in the name of the Great British Constitution to use every means in our power to have the foundation principles, yea, the very spirit and letter too of the British Constitution, the guiding principles of both Government and Capital in our country and Empire.

(Jacobs 1976 Page 224)

The enemies of the British constitution and the protestant worldview are then the un-constitutionalists, fascists, papists. Butler has then, leading into the cauldron of 1937 that boiled over on the 19th June 1937, in fact completed his discourse utilised to engage with the colonial order.

The demonised other of Butler’s discourse is the un-constitutionalists, fascists, and papists. The protagonists of the discourse are the natives British to the core, British constitutionalists, anti-fascists, and anti-papists. The nucleus of the discourse is Butler, the originator, and articulator of the discourse that places him in the centre of the vortex, the maximum leader.

Butler wrote two letters dated the 2nd June 1937 one addressed to Lt. Col. H.C.B. Hickling, attorney for Apex (Trinidad) Oilfields Ltd., and the other to the Governor of the colony. Butler in his letter to Hickling would present seven realities for Hickling’s notice. Butler states:

(4) That you joined the, Constitutionally speaking, Bastards of Empire and are today a very Commander of these ‘gentry’ (C.B.E.) by your un-Christian and un-British policy of creating and spreading disaffection, dissatisfaction and disloyalty amongst certain followers of us who are sworn Protestants, and Constitutionalists, when, on the most obviously foolish and insincere pretexts, you dared to turn deaf ears, to turn down Petitions praying for a general increase in the Wages of all your employees

Butler is then assaulting Hickling, the legal representative of the recalcitrant oil company on the basis of his discourse. The key to the entire power relation at this time in June 1937 is the nature of the response of the colonial state to Butler’s assaults. He continues:

"(6) That compulsory surrender by you of the legitimate rights of Petroleum Workers of Trinidad can only be brought about by the workers themselves. And they are sure getting to know it rapidly for they are about ready to go on a general Sit-down Strike to win for themselves a better and brighter British day.

This is therefore to request you to take notice that within a month we shall call upon all petroleum workers to go on a general Sit-down strike in yet another British effort at winning for the workers in question the fullest British Constitutional Rights and Privileges-Equality of Opportunity for existence the same as you or anybody else now in a position to dominate and exploit poor helpless mortals in beautiful Trinidad-now enjoy."

(Jacobs 1976 Page 223)

Butler has therefore formally served notice of a sit down strike in the Apex oilfields. For him it is a thoroughly British effort within the ambit of the British Constitution strategically necessary for natives British to the core in light of the un-Christian, un-constitutional policies of the oil companies and the administrators of the colony. He ends his letter to Hickling as follows:

You are going home; but make no mistake about it, you and not Mr. Fletcher, your successor, are altogether responsible for the spirit of restlessness, and lawlessness, discontent and dissatisfaction which clearly manifests itself in the ranks of the Petroleum Workers of the Colony whose ambitions-British ambitions-not the least of which is ‘A Higher Standard of Living’-you have so ruthlessly trampled underfoot in the best known Fascist style.

(Jacobs 1976 Page 223)

Butler then closes the letter of notices to Hickling by invoking the core discursive constructs to demonise him the archetype of the racist, fascist, un-constitutionalist.

The second letter dated the 2nd June 1937 in the hand of Butler was addressed to the Governor of the Colony and is in fact the epitome of playing mind games with a colonial overlord. Butler opens the letter by indicating the following:

the present hostile attitude of the Oil Workers being what it is as the result of the failure of their many and varied constitutional pleas, prayers, petitions for more pay and better all round conditions of life and labour on the oilfields of the colony.

(Jacobs 1976 Page 224)

Butler affirms the present hostile attitude of oil workers and indicates that it is in fact a labour dispute, a struggle of a specific section of the workers of the colony. Butler was then not projecting a vision of island wide apocalypse, of anticolonial revolt. His focus was limited to that of the oil workers, the labour dispute with the oil companies and the means to settle the dispute, to defuse the ‘present hostile attitude of the oil workers’. He would then indicate that:

. it is most desirable that you Sir accede to our demand for an early meeting of representatives of the Employer and Employee class before Government.

(Jacobs 1976 Page 224)

Why then must the Governor accede to Butler’s demand? For it is:

one way left open to avert what I shall be forced to call off if these poor, simple, oppressed souls are not given justice in the circumstances within the course of a month, namely a general sit-down strike of Petroleum Workers of Trinidad.

(Jacobs 1976 Page 224)

Butler now takes off the kid gloves to reveal the mailed black fist by asserting two discursive positions of:

(a) That the failure to accede to demands for justice made by oil workers would result in Butler calling for and effecting a sit down general strike of oil workers in the colony.

(b) That Butler is the maximum leader of the poor, simple oppressed souls, for only he can call for and call off the general sit-down strike of oil workers.

It is then fitting, effective and logical for the Governor to meet and treat with Butler for he commands support of these poor, simple, oppressed souls. Finally in the said letter Butler lays down the gauntlet for the colonial overlord. Butler intimates:

Thus shall you Sir avert a scene unparalleled in the history of the Empire, the sight of a body of men coming out in open rebellion against the Constituted Authority with the full knowledge of the Constitutional Authority to bring them to justice. So, please do not tempt us to be disloyal by closing your ears to our appeal for justice and fairplay in the circumstances.

(Jacobs 1976 Pages 224&225)

Butler speaks of open rebellion against a de-legitimised Constitutional Authority. "Constitutional Authority of the British Empire has been de-legitimised by the fascist un-constitutionalist actions of the colonial overlord.

Butler then paints a picture in June 1937 of natives British to the core in revolt against an impotent, de-legitimised colonial state seeking to acquire the rights, duties, obligations and privileges accorded to natives British to the core, citizens of the great British Empire guaranteed under the British Constitution.

The question arises if Butler fully understood the nature of the response that the colonial overlord was duty bound to respond with to his discursive and organizational assaults upon the oil companies and the colonial administration. In June 1937 the model for response to colonial challenge to the colonial hegemony was colonial India.

The response had then to be brutal in its oppression for in the worldview of the colonial overlords, regardless of the natives being British to the core, the colonized existed to serve the colonial overlord, nothing more, nothing less. That the colonial administration of the colony responded in keeping with the model of Colonial India is reflected in correspondence to the Governor by Butler dated the 4th June 1937 and the 6th June 1937.

In the letter dated the 4th June 1937 from Butler to the governor it is clearly apparent that Butler was grievously aggravated by the summons served on him to appear in the La Brea Magistrate’s Court on the 14th June 1937. Butler remonstrates:

(5) That there is certainly an attempt at interference on the part of your government, despite the many warnings I have cause to be served with, as enclosed citation or summons commanding me to appear before a man whose court can never be properly be constituted save by Act of Parliament clearly proves. And that (Jacobs 1976 Page 231)

The colonial overlord ratcheted up the pressure on Butler and his movement through both overt and covert means. Butler would now be brought before the Magistrate’s Court based upon his utterances at the meetings in Sobo, La Brea. Butler responds as expected in keeping with his discourse by refusing to be summoned or commanded by a court, which has no authority to do so.

A position repeated in 1984 by the Jamaat al Muslimeen over the issue of the erection of the masjid at No.1 Mucurapo Road, which resulted in the granting of an interlocutory injunction to the Port-of-Spain City Corporation, which is the legal basis for the conflict that drove the events to the flash points culminated in the jihad of 1990.

Butler rejects the authority of the colonial courts and the colonial administration, but he persists in demanding that the governor negotiate with him on a face-to-face basis towards a resolution of the flashpoint of the day. He is then pursuing a policy of belligerence tinged with an apocalyptic vision.

Wittingly or unwittingly Butler repeatedly indicated to the colonial overlord that the colony was now tottering on anarchy, rebellion, race war and Butler the maximum leader held the means to command the masses, the natives, British to the core.

In light of this, Butler was in fact demanding that the governor now not only recognize his ascendancy over the masses of natives British to the core, but grant space within the realms of governance to Butler empowering him to now command state power. Butler was then insisting upon a government of representatives of the colonial overlord and the maximum leader of the natives British to the core. A government of national unity. He states:

For the sake of the Peace and Unity of Empire, I demand that you invite me to appear before you and your legal advisers if you please, as soon as possible to hear why I shall never obey commands like the one in question and will be forced to make your government pay and pay damn dearly too for anything we shall interpret as unconstitutional action .

(Jacobs 1976 Page 231)

The letter of June 6th 1937 exposes the heightening tension between Butler and the colonial overlord over the actions of the colonial police against Butler and his political party. It is apparent that a deliberate policy of harassment of Butler under colonial law was being strategically implemented.

It is obvious that the colonial overlords moved to precipitate confrontation thereby enabling the colonial police and military to brutally stamp out the But-lerite movement and its leader. Butler and his party by way of letter dated the 6th June 1937 expressed their outrage against police harassment and oppression as follows:

Inspector Power has planned to carry into effect a policy of studied interference in the free public and private activities of this party, samples of which we have already seen in Lance Corporal Detective John’s exciting and highly unconstitutional and improper conduct towards us and our hall meetings which led to his ejection on no fewer than two occasions and a charge" of Obstruction by Sergeant Nelson of the La Brea Constabulary laid against the leader of the party-the