| Urhobo Historical Society |
Itsekiri Land Claims in Sapele
and the
Jackson Judgement
_______________________
In the Protectorate of Nigeria
In The High Court of the Warri Judicial
Division
Suit No. W/37/1941
Between
|
Chief Ayomano
and Edwin Omarin on behalf of themselves and the Chiefs
and people of Sapele. |
...... |
Plaintiffs |
and
|
Ginuwa II, His Highness The Olu for himself
and as representing the Itsekiri people of Sapele. |
...... |
Defendants |
Judgment
The plaintiffs
claim, on
behalf of themselves and of the Chiefs and the people of the Okpe Clan,
as
against the defendant, for himself and as representing the Itsekiri
people of
Sapele, a declaration of title to all that area of land now known as
the
Township of Sapele, as shown in the plan approved by the Governor,
exhibited in
Court and marked as No. I.
Pleadings were
filed. In these pleadings, and during the
course of
the proceedings, the plaintiffs refer to Sapele as URUAPELE, and
described
themselves as URUBOS, the defendants they described variously as JEKRI
or
ITSEKIRI. On the other hand the
defendants call themselves ITSEKIRIS and refer to the plaintiffs as
SOBOS,
whilst calling the land in dispute SAPELE.
In all legislations these tribes are described as being SOBOS
and JEKRIS
respectively. In prior litigation as
reported in the Law Reports they have always been referred to as SOBOS
and
JEKRIS. Elderly men who gave evidence
for the plaintiffs referred naturally to their people as SOBOS and the
town as
SAPELE, later correcting themselves on the same breath.
MR. I. PALMER, a Yoruba, who has lived in
Sapele since 1898 tells me that he always heard the names SOBOS and
JEKRIS
until quite recently. As prior
litigation will be referred to, in this judgment, and, to avoid any
confusion I
propose to refer to these tribes by the names under which the
legislation
recognizes them, namely as SOBOS and JEKRIS.
It is said that, by
tradition, the Sobos migrated from the ancestral home of the Yoruba�s
at IFE
and traveling via Benin and Okperisi founded a town known as OREROKPE. Chief Omarin testifies that from this mother
town the various families went out, in all directions, founding other
villages,
among which was SAPELE, but retained their allegiance to the mother
town of the
OKPES to where each village would subscribe each year to the OREROKPE
festivals. I am told that the name of
the town Sapele (URUAPELE)
is
derived from the name of the juju belonging to the family who were the
original
settlers in that place, and that these settlers we re a part of the
Clan, centered
at OREROKPE, and who know themselves as the OKPE Clan.
A Clan is described to me as being in the
nature of an extended family, each member related, in some degree, by a
blood
tie with the common ancestor. The people
were farmers, and, they settled upon this land and farmed for their
living.
From that period of
tradition
there is a void in history, as it occurs in all countries where a
national
tradition is built up partly from folklore and later from history
derived from
the memories of old men and women. The
[items
of] evidence of events within living memory are those connected [with]:�
(a)
the
domestic life of the community from the past 80
years;
(b)
the
arrival of the European Mercantile Firms;
(c)
the
Nanna Expedition of 1894, and later
(d)
the
growth and the development of the Township under
the aegis of the Government of Nigeria subsequent to the acquisition of
this
land by Government in 1908.
The evidence dates
from the earliest
times of living memory, and the evidence of Amune Aparo (4th
witness) I accept as being an entirely reliable account.
He was a very old gentleman of not less than
80 years of age who, until his conversion to Christianity, was the juju
priest
of the juju known as �Sapele�. He tells
me that the main Sobo village was situated originally where the prison
yard is
today, and that where the firm of Messrs Mclvers Ltd is today, was a
hamlet
founded by one OGODO, who lived there with his family until the Firm
came, and
who leased the land from OGODO, who then removed to the site where his
descendants still live, just outside the Township along side the main
Sapele-Warri motor road. [According to]
this witness, the whole area now claimed was farmed by these Sobos. He personally knew the fathers of the present
plaintiffs who, among others, farmed these lands. He
tells me that from his earliest days he
can remember JEKRIS visiting Sapele�coming there with goods for barter,
exchanging their goods for the farm produce of the SOBOS, and returning
in
their canoes from where they came.
It appears, from
the
evidence, that European Mercantile Firms established themselves at
Sapele
before Government established their offices there, and that, when they
came, in
exchange for �dashes� of gin, tobacco and clothes the SOBOS gave them
permission to settle and to erect buildings on the shore.
That is the plaintiffs� evidence. The
defendants offer no evidence whatsoever
of the conditions under which they originally settled there. Their arrival appears to have been
practically contemporaneous with an event, which was one of
considerable
significance in this area, and which is known locally as the �Nanna
War�,
hostilities lasting for about 5 months in that year 1894.
There is no dispute
between
Chief of the Jekri tribe, who ruled the Jekris for a brief period
during an
interregnum from 1848 to 1936, during which period the Jekris ceased to
possess
their hereditary ruler known to them as the �OLU�, the position which
the defendant
occupies today. The status of the OLU
was judicially defined in the case of Omagbemi v. Dore Numa N.L. R.
Vol. 5 p.
17. �That monarchy was overthrown and
the Jekris themselves directed how and by whom their country was to be
ruled.
Nanna followed
Chanomi as the
accredited head of the Jekri nation. He
was clearly a man held in the greatest respect by JEKRIS and SOBOS
alike. The causes of this �Nanna War� have
been described
variously to me, but, I do not think it would be unfair to the memory
of Nanna
to describe it as being due to his reactionary spirit and his
opposition to the
abolition of the slave trade, in which he had a considerable interest
as a
possessor of slaves, and his realisation that its abolition would
ultimately
tend to destroy that monopoly of trade which he had enjoyed upon the
rivers
through mediary of these slaves. The
British Government overcame his opposition by force of arms and he was
deported. The evidence shows that Dore
Numa succeeded Nanna and, I am again quoting from the case of Omagbemi
v. Dore,
where the findings of fact necessary to found a decision in the case,
bind the
defendants:
�Sir, R.
Moore appointed him (i.e. Dore) paramount Chief of the Jekris, but in
appointing him Paramount Chief and spokesman of all the Jekris he was
officially recognised as the head of the Jekri nation and the man with
whom the
Government would negotiate in all matter connected with the Jekri
nation and
their land.�
I have interpolated
these
matters at this stage as the status of Dore as recognised by Government
is of
importance later when interpreting a deed put in evidence.
The evidence shows
that after
the overthrow of Nanna at his town EBROHIMI a large number of Jekris
ran for
refuge to Sapele and there obtained the permission of the Sobos to
settle,
giving customary �dashes� for the grant of that privilege.
This was in 1894. Some time later, the date is unknown, the
firm of Messrs Mclevers Ltd arrived and obtained the permission of
OGODO to
settle. The son of OGODO gave evidence,
namely OTOTO OGODO, that each year the Firm paid the sum of �20 rent to
his
father, and that since his father�s death, and, to this very day they
pay to him �20 each year.
The evidence shows
that
during these years following 1894, the
men whose authority was recognised by the Sobos as being their Chiefs
were
OFOTOKU, who was the oldest and regarded as the senior, the fathers of
the
present plaintiffs and OGODO, who was described to me as being a man
both of
wealth and of powerful personality.
Mr. I. Palmer, who
was
formerly a Diplomatic Agent employed by the Royal Niger Company, and,
who is 83
years old, tells me that when he retired from the service he proposed
settling down
in Sapele as a trader, and went there for that purpose in 1899. He tells me that the vice Counsul directed
him to the District Commissioner who was then living at Sapele and that
a
Yoruba man, named Ogugbene, then, introduced him to OFOTOKU, who was
recognised
then as being the head Chief, and who then lived on the site now
occupied by
the market.
OFOTOKU showed him
the piece
of land, which he might occupy, the site occupied by Mr. Palmer today. OFOTOKU did not wish to receive rent, and, as
Mr. Palmer tells me, in those days, the people were only too glad to
welcome
and accommodate any who brought trade, but that, upon the advice of his
Solicitor, he paid, and has since paid to OFOTOKU and his successors a
sum of
�5 each year as rent, a rent which he still pays today.
He tells me that at no time has he paid one
penny rent to Government, who are now the lessees of the land, and his
position
appears to be analogous to the one occupied by Messrs.
Mclvers Ltd.
This witness testified that later he assisted the Bishop to
acquire the
site, upon which St. Luke�s Church now stands, for the Church
Missionary
Society and that, in doing so, he introduced the Bishop to OFOTOKU and
to the
late Omarin, the father of the present plaintiff, as being the persons
entitled
by custom to deal with the land. This
was prior to the lease to Government of the land in 1908.
There is also
evidence to
show that further WEST, just beyond and adjacent to the Township
boundary
there, the Baptist Mission sought and obtained from the plaintiffs
permission
to settle and to build a Church and School.
Mr. Mbanefo objected that this evidence was not relevant, as the
land
acquired by the Baptist Mission was outside the area claimed. I ruled that this evidence was both
admissible and relevant for the following reasons.
There has been no suggestion that the Township
boundary formed a natural boundary between two separate holdings. The evidence of the defendants themselves
suggests that the plaintiffs farmed far inland, and upon the evidence
before me
I am satisfied that a unity of character exists between the area in
dispute and
the area within which the Baptist Mission is built, as to lead to the
fair inference
that both are subject to the same rights, and constitute in fact but
parts of
an entire property.
There is, further,
the
evidence of a letter, written on the 11th June, 1907 and
exhibited
in Court as No. 5, which Chief William Moore, a witness called by the
defendants, admits is in the hand writing of his old schoolmaster,
Ikuke
Etotoma, who was a Jekri, who occupied land opposite to the site
described on the
plan as Renner�s compound. This letter
certifies that this piece of land was given to Ikuke by Chief Omarin
for the
purposes of building. This is a
declaration by a deceased person, who is a predecessor in title to the
present
defendants, and which declaration, in the nature of the defence now set
up, is
admissible in evidence as an admission against proprietary interest.
Now, what is the
evidence of
the defendants as regards this period of time between 1809 and 1908? In effect the only evidence is that during
the whole of that period Jekris have lived on this land.
That fact is not disputed by the evidence of
witnesses called by the plaintiffs, and to whose evidence I have
attached
credence. The defendants admit that on
no occasion, during this period, or during any other period has rent
been
either demanded or obtained from the Sobos at any time.
The evidence of the defendants is entirely
silent upon the manner and the terms upon which the European Mercantile
Firms
first established themselves. I have
heard bombastic claims to Royal privilege and overlordship over the
Sobos, but
not one title of evidence has been advanced in support of such a claim. I should have expected, at least, to have
heard some evidence that a Jekri exercised some degree of authority as
a Chief
in this area. There is not a murmur of
any such evidence -- other than a suggestion that the last 9 lines of a
letter
written by Omarin on behalf of the elders of Sapele and exhibited by
the
defendants as Exb. �A� means -- that the
OLU controlled the land. In my view such
an interpretation goes wholly beyond the bounds of reason.
Omarin the writer tells me it means what it
says, to wit, that the Sobos formerly traded with the Ijaws, but
finding the
Jekris better clients, they transferred their custom to the Jekris and
that to
prevent the Ijaws victimizing them in any way, the OLU sent a �Captain�
(a man
versed in the ways of war) to protect the OLU�s traders there. In other words it is admitted that to protect
the trade between the Jekris and the Sobos and to prevent interference
by the
Ijaws, the OLU sent a �Captain� who may
be described I think fairly accurately as possessing the functions
rather of
policeman than of a soldier.
Now on the 3rd
December, 1908, the Governor of the Colony of Southern Nigeria acquired
a lease
of this land for a term of 99 years at an annual rental of �100 from
�Chief
Dore Numa of Benin River, Trader, acting for and on behalf of the
Chiefs and
people of Sapele�.
Apart from the
traditional
history adduced by the defendants the above is I think a fair summary
of the
events evidencing acts of ownership both by the plaintiffs and the
defendants
prior to the lease. I do not propose to
comment upon that fantastic story of tradition, which I feel must have
emanated
largely from the fertile brain of that self-styled historian, Chief
William
Moore, other than to say that it appeared to afford a considerable
amount of
amusement to the Sobos in Court, and I must confess to myself. As a background, or a frame to the picture of
events within living memory, it appears to have no relation whatsoever.
The plaintiffs tell
me that
Chief Dore Numa they regarded as their friend, until certain events
occurred in
1932. They tell me that he was a Trader
and a Political Agent who had considerable influence with the Officers
of the
Government of that day, and that when Government negotiated for a lease
of this
land, they authorised Chief Dore to complete the negotiations and to
sign the
deed on their behalf purely as a friend.
They tell me that they were highly satisfied with the result and
that
for his assistance to them in this matter permitted him to take each
year �30
at first, and later, �40 of the �100 rent given to them by Government. The evidence called by the plaintiffs shows
that until 1932 the relations between them and Dore remained cordial,
but ceased
then, when Dore claimed Sapele land to be his, and ordered the Jekris
living
there and around to pay no more rent to the Sobos; a claim which the
defendants
assert to this day, and which ultimately compelled the plaintiffs to
come to
this Court to rebut. Dore died in the
same year, and the evidence before me is quite clear, that, short of
taking
action in the Courts, the plaintiffs by petition and by complaint to
the Local
Administrative Officers of the Government, protested at the Jekris
claims to
overlordship, requested that the rents should not be paid into the Olu
Trust
Fund, as had been done just prior, and subsequently to Dore�s death,
and
claimed the whole rents. The evidence of
the Resident, Major Bowen, shows that everything that tact and patience
demanded was done to obtain a settlement between these closely
intermarried
tribes. Reasoning appears to have been
fruitless and as Major Bowen tells me, �I told both parties that I was
tired of
them and that they could go to Court if they wanted to.
This was a year ago.�
The defendants in
paragraph 5
of their statement of defence say that �Chief Dore Numa leased the
Sapele
Township in his own authority as the representative of the OLU of
ITSEKIRI who
has ever been the rightful owner of the land for the Itsekiri people.�
Chief William Moore
tells me
that he saw Dore sign this deed in the office at Sapele in 1908 where
he had,
that year, been employed by the Government as a clerk.
Chief Omarin said he knew when Dore signed
the lease, but there is no evidence that he witnessed its signature.
Mr. Palmer asserted
in very
certain terms that the deed was executed in a manner described very
eloquently
by him as being done on the �Q.T.� His allegation that it was signed at
OLOGBO
I place no reliance upon, as this was hearsay evidence derived from a
conversation with Dore, and it was apparently rather a conversation by
noods
and winks, than of words.
Nowhere in the Deed
can I
find any record of the locality in which it was signed.
The �Oath for proof of an instrument� sworn
by Mr. H. M. Douglas, the then Senior District Commissioner, was made
at Warri
on the 11th November 1908 and it affirms that, on that same
day, the
Deed was not only signed by Dore but was read over and interpreted to
him at
the time of its execution and that he appeared to understand its
provisions.
Now Chief William
Moore told
me that the deed was explained to Dore before he signed it, but that he
cannot
remember what the explanation was. He
can remember Jekri Chiefs being present, but cannot remember if any
Sobo Chiefs
were there. At that time no motor road
connected Sapele and Warri which today is a road 31 miles long. In those days, I am told the journey was made
by foot or by cycle. It may be true, but
it seems difficult to credit, that if the deed was in fact signed at
Sapele why
the oath of proof did not say so. The
matter is not one of much importance either way, and, the only
evidenctiary
value of that deed is as to the interpretation of the status of the
parties
named therein and of the capacity in which they conveyed.
At that time the
Government
of Southern Nigeria, as I have mentioned before, had recognised Chief
Dore
officially as the paramount Chief of the Jekris with whom they would
negotiate
in all matters connected with the Jekri and their land.
There is evidence that all Chiefs whether
Jekri or Sobo were appointed upon Dore�s recommendation, and provided
the Sobos
did so authorise, and the plaintiffs tell me they did, there could be
no
possible objection to Dore signing such a deed on their behalf provided
that
the lessee (the Government) were satisfied that Dore possessed that
authority. Now, if the land, at that
time, was Jekri land why, in the Deed, is Dore not referred to by his
officially recognised title as the Paramount Chief of the Jekris. The lease was acquired under the provisions
of the public Lands Ordinance (Chapter CXII Laws of the Colony of
Southern
Nigeria, 1908 Vol. II p. 1196) and Dore would possess all the
attributes of a
�Head Chief�. Why not so described him
if he purported to convey Jekri lands as their Head Chief?
Who were the
�Chiefs and
people of Sapele� at that time? I have
already found, as a fact, that the only persons who exercised any
authority
upon the land, as Chiefs prior to 1908 were Sobos and were not Jekris. The plaintiffs tell me that Dore conveyed to
the Government in his private capacity as their agent for this purpose. The deed sets out �Chief Dore Numa of Benin
River, Trader, acting for and on behalf of the Chiefs and people of
Sapele.�
The evidence before
me
satisfies me that when Chief Dore Numa did convey this land to
Government for a
term of years he did so upon the authority of the Chiefs and people of
Sapele,
who were members of the Okpe Clan who were residing in that area and
around it,
now known as the Sapele Township.
If any further
evidence was
required to establish the truth of the plaintiffs� allegation it is to
be found
in the evidence of Chief William Moore himself.
He tells me that he and others petitioned in 1930 against Dore
for
keeping these rents himself, and that is precisely what the plaintiffs
intended
Dore should do with the money, as they tell me, and apparently it was
exactly
what he did with it.
The only arguments
advance by
Counsel for the defendants were firstly that the Okpe Clan as a whole
is not
entitled to any declaration of title as sought as only individuals of
that Clan
have been proved to possess any interest in that land, and that
secondly, the
plaintiffs have accepted benefits from his lease for 34 years and have
permitted the defendants to take rent for that period, as owners and
that their
acquiescence now stops them from setting up their present claim.
In regard to the
first
argument, the Okpe Clan, indisputably, occupied the land in dispute as
farm
land known as Sapele or Uruapele. The
greater contains the less and the plaintiffs Omarin and Ayomano are
undoubtedly
blood descendants of the founders of the original village known as
Sapele.
As regards
acquiescence, the
argument of learned Counsel entirely begs the question.
The plaintiffs have in no matters other than
that which they allege and which they have proved to be the true facts,
namely
that as owners of the land, who had authorised Dore to convey on their
behalf,
they have permitted him to retain as a personal prerequisite the sum of
�40 out
of the �100 rent paid by the Government, in recognition of his personal
services. These services terminated on
his death and there is ample evidence that since his death the
plaintiffs have
claimed the whole rent, and have actively opposed the manner in which
it was
dealt with through the Olu Trust Fund.
The plaintiffs have
been
forced into Court by the denial by Dore, and later by his successors in
title,
of their ownership of the land, and I can find no substance in the
defendants�
claim in their defence either as to ownership or as to overlordship. They might well be described as impudent
claims.
I don not wish to
give
expression to any further opinion, as to the merits of this case, that
might be
construed so as to retard a full and free reconciliation between the
parties,
who are members of separate tribes who appear to find their only common
denomination in the fact of close intermarriage, a fact which should be
a
potent factor in arriving at an amicable settlement of their
differences.
I do grant to the
plaintiffs
Ayomano and Omarin, and to those members of the Okpe Clan who are the
blood descendants
of the founders of the settlement now known as Sapele lands, a
declaration of
title that they are the owners of that land now commonly known as the
Sapele
Township.
The plaintiffs are
entitled
to the full costs of this action which I assess at �150.
(Sgd.) J.
Jackson
A.
J. at
Warri.
5/5/1942.
Certified
true copy.
(Sgd.) E. Bamgboye
Registrar.