The two theatres of War were distinct responses to the implementation of the taxation clause of the Protectorate Ordinance; however, in the southern region of the Protectorate, the uprising was also a response to the actions of Europeans and Creoles in the hinterland. [...] In the final section of this study, the aftermath of the Hut Tax War and the implications this had on the political advancement of the Creoles shall be briefly examined as a factor that led to the decline of the Creole community in the twentieth century. [...] The sentiments of the Creoles reflected in the press during the course of the conflict were rooted in the opinions Sierra Leoneans held about the House Tax prior to the uprising.102 Furthermore, the strong opposition to taxation amongst the Creole community reflected a tradition that dated back to the founding of the Sierra Leone Colony. [...] In “One thing and another”, James Augustus Fitzjohn, the editor of the newspaper, criticized the Governor for the “amount of mischief, the practice of concealing the real state of affairs in the hinterland is working in Freetown.”132 Furthermore, in the second article in the Sierra Leone Times that had been cited for disloyalty by the Attorney-General, it is evident that the Freetown press sought. [...] However, the actions of Sierra Leoneans who encouraged indigenous peoples to refuse to pay the hut tax in the southern region of the hinterland, could hardly be the basis for the outbreak of violence and the massacre of Sierra Leoneans that took place following the commencement of the second uprising on the 27th of April, 1898.
Authors
Related Organizations
- Pages
- 197
- Published in
- Sierra Leone
