The 'White Highlands' of Kenya

Abstract

The term 'the White Highlands* was derived from the official policy that certain agricultural lands in Kenya should be reserved for settlers of European origin. The termination of this policy after a period of nearly sixty years makes this an appropriate time to examine which were the areas included in the White Highlands and why. To early explorers and administrators, the cool climate and absence of population over large areas of the highlands of what is now called Kenya suggested the possibility of European settlement. In 1901 much of this land lay within the boundaries of Uganda and Sir Harry Johnston was able to report (Cmd. 671)'. . . here we have a territory (now that the Uganda Railway is built) admirably suited for a white man's country, and I can say this, with no thought of injustice to any native race, for the country in question is either utterly uninhabited for miles and miles or at most its inhabitants are wandering hunters who have no settled home, or whose fixed habitation is the lands outside the healthy The first Land Regulations (of the East Africa Protectorate) were published as early as 1897 but little alienation took place until after the construction of the Uganda Railway, which reached Nairobi in 1899 and Lake Victoria in 1901, when settlement was greatly encouraged and the regula? tions were replaced by the Crown Lands Ordinance, 1902. Under this Ordinance, grants of Crown Lands could be made freehold or by leases of up to ninety-nine years. The Commissioner of Lands was not empowered to sell or lease any land in the actual occupation of the natives and further, if any grants were made which were subsequently found to contain African settlements, these settlements were deemed to be excluded from the lease so long as they were occupied. It was never contemplated that grants of land could be made to Africans, who had already selected the areas they chose to occupy. However, another immigrant community was interested in farming land in the highlands, the Asians, particularly as represented by the labourers brought from India to assist in the building of the railway. Under pressure from the Government of India, the contracts of these workers could be terminated in East Africa instead of in India, if the worker so desired. It is clear that by 1902 grants of Crown Land for agricultural purposes in the highlands were being restric? ted to Europeans or Americans, so that, although applications were invited from In? dians to lease agricultural land, the area lying between Kiu and Fort Ternan was specifically excluded. This policy was approved by Lord Elgin, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in July 1906. Thus the Commissioner of Lands would only grant Crown Land for agricultural purposes within the highlands area, which was understood to extend from approximately Kiu to Fort Ternan railway stations, to Europeans. Furthermore, the lease could not be transferred without the approval of the Commissioner, who would presumably apply the same policy to the transfer as he had to the original grant. When the Crown Land Ordinance, 1915, replaced that of 1902 a further extension of this policy was written into section 36 as follows: There shall by virtue of this Ordinance be implied in every lease granted under this part to a European a covenant that he shall not without the consent of the Governor in Council appoint or allow a non-European to be a manager or otherwise to occupy or be in control of the land leased*.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 81 citations exist upstream.