All Contact Details. This benchmark shape was designed based on mathematical principles such that the proportions ensure that white light reflects through the top of the diamond and sparkle is not lost. Today, the Oppenheimer family still owns the mining company. Cut and polished to perfect proportions, this flawlessly symmetrical design displays an eight-heart pattern when viewed from the bottom and an eight-arrow star when viewed from the top.
This stunning eight-sided stone is designed to reflect light from any angle, not just the top. This cut, which displays a 10 hearts pattern when seen from below and a 10 arrows pattern when seen from above, was designed to reflect all of the light that enters the gem back through the top, with no leakage whatsoever. See More. Cape Town Events Calendar. November Events Today Most Read. A market in the park Shop for gems, gifts at the Rondebosch Park Market. Adventure alert: 4 awesome routes with We asked you where you would go with a Your answers were delightful plus Uber Go explained.
Do Good 3 ways to do it at Oasis: shop, donate or take your recycling there. Cakes too beautiful to eat, short rib dumplings and gorgeous harbour views. Craving a wild night out? Leopards Leap serves succulent A beach bar in Paarl! Pizza, beach vibes, cocktails, and stunning views, the recipe for a perfect day.
On January 25, , a Wichita, Kansas, television station receives a postcard from the BTK killer that leads police to discover a Post Toasties cereal box that had been altered to contain the letters BTK.
This communication was one in a long line sent by the serial killer who On January 25, , the Continental Congress authorizes the first national Revolutionary War memorial in honor of Brigadier General Richard Montgomery, who had been killed during an assault on Quebec on December 31, Montgomery, along with Benedict Arnold, led a On January 25, , in Paris, delegates to the peace conference formally approve the establishment of a commission on the League of Nations.
President Woodrow Wilson insisted on chairing the commission—for him, the establishment of the League lay squarely at the center of Live TV. This Day In History. History Vault. Cold War. World War II. Sign Up. Art, Literature, and Film History. In Griqualand West was annexed as part of the Cape Colony. During the period to , Griqualand West was under the control of three different administrations, each of which enacted different diamond mining legislation.
This article provides a historical overview of the diamond mining legislation that was enacted in Griqualand West from to in order to determine the factors which influenced the development of diamond mining legislation in Griqualand West. Keywords : Diamond mining legislation; Griqualand West; mining; prospecting; diamonds; land tenure. The discovery of diamonds in South Africa played an important part in the development of the country's economy.
The Eureka diamond, which is acknowledged to be the first diamond discovered in South Africa, was discovered in in the district of Hopetown, an area which was then regarded as "no-man's land". It was, following the discovery of diamonds, simply referred to as the diamond fields 1 and in it was proclaimed as British territory. The period after the proclamation of Griqualand West as a British territory in may - from a diamond mining perspective - be divided into three periods.
First, the period between and during which Griqualand West was under the control of Sir Barkly as Governor, and administered by three Commissioners.
Second, the period from until when Griqualand West was designated a province and became a British Crown Colony, 2 and, third, the period after the annexation of Griqualand West as part of the Cape Colony in During each of these periods, different legislative measures were adopted to regulate the search for diamonds and the working of claims in Griqualand West.
In this article, the historical development of the diamond mining legislation that was enacted in Griqualand West from until the annexation thereof as part of the Cape Colony in is analysed. During the two years that Sir Barkly governed Griqualand West through the three Commissioners, approximately seventy-four proclamations were passed.
Three of these proclamations were important from a diamond mining perspective. In the first proclamation, namely the Griqualand West Proclamation 71 of 27 October hereafter the GW Diggings Proclamation , provision was made for rules and regulations under which the search for diamonds or digging of claims in Griqualand West had to be carried out.
And in the third proclamation, the Griqualand West Proclamation 59 of 7 November hereafter the GW Prospecting Proclamation provision was made for regulations for the payment of licences for prospecting on private property.
Each of these three proclamations impacted on the development of the right to mine diamonds in Griqualand West and they are discussed in the following subsections. The GW Diggings Proclamation was adopted to regulate the working of claims to extract diamonds once a diamond field had been proclaimed.
Its purpose was thus to regulate the working of claims after the diamonds had already been discovered and a diamond field proclaimed. The prospecting or searching for diamonds was not regulated under the GW Diggings Proclamation. The GW Diggings Proclamation referred to the "searching" for diamonds in the context of the working or digging of claims in proclaimed diamond fields. Each diamond field proclaimed under the GW Diggings Proclamation was divided into different claims.
There was no statutory reservation of the rights to diamonds in favour of the British Crown or the Government of the Cape Colony during the period that Griqualand West was administered by the three Commissioners.
The question as to who was entitled to work claims where diamonds had already been discovered depended on the specific form of land tenure. Three types of land tenure were acknowledged in the GW Diggings Proclamation. These three forms were, first, Crown land; second, private land and the title of which was subject to the reservation of rights to diamonds, presumably in favour of the British Crown hereafter in this article referred to as reserved private land ; 8 and third, private land without any such reservation in the title deed of the land hereafter in this article referred to as unreserved private land.
The GW Diggings Proclamation did not provide definitions for these different types of land tenure. In the case of the discovery of diamonds on Crown land or reserved private land, the High Commissioner was entitled to proclaim, by public advertisement, a diamond field on the Crown land or reserved private land.
In the case of the proclamation of a diamond field on reserved private land, the consent of the relevant landowner was not required for the proclamation of a diamond field, although certain measures were adopted in an attempt to accommodate the landowner. In the case of the discovery of diamonds on unreserved private land, the consent of the landowner was required before a diamond field could be proclaimed.
Every claimholder had to pay a royalty or rent. In the case of Crown land and reserved private land the sum of licence monies, royalties or rent that the holder of a digging licence had to pay, was prescribed. The Civil Commissioner had to collect the monthly payments to be made by the diggers in respect of diamond fields proclaimed on unreserved private land and account to the relevant landholder, withholding one-tenth of the money recovered and any costs incurred for the establishment and maintenance of the land on which the diamond field was situated.
The rules or by-laws, including those rules and by-laws that had previously been adopted in respect of existing diggings, had to be sent to the Civil Commissioner for approval. Claimholders could transfer their claims provided that the Inspector had registered the transfer of the claims and that all licence money, royalty or rent and registration fees due and payable had been paid in respect of the relevant claim. This system provided that diggers had to work their claims continuously, which assisted in the uniform working of a pit.
Although a diamond field could be proclaimed on reserved private land without the consent of the landowner, certain measures were included in the GW Diggings Proclamation to protect the interests of the landowner. The High Commissioner first had to attempt to reach an agreement with the landowner of the reserved private land on the terms and conditions on which diamond diggings on the reserved private land could be worked or the terms on which diggers could search for diamonds on the reserved private land.
If they could not reach an agreement, the High Commissioner could simply enter the reserved private land or cause such land to be entered in order to take possession of the mines and the diamonds therein on behalf of the British Crown, provided that notice of the entry was given to the landowner.
The amount that was payable for any damage to the surface and soil of the reserved private land had to be agreed on between the landowner and the High Commissioner within a period of three months. Although the GW Quieting Proclamation did not specifically refer to diamonds, it impacted on the searching for diamonds and the working of diamond diggings in Griqualand West.
All persons that claimed any title or right of possession or any other right in land within Griqualand West, were requested to submit a written statement to the Civil Commissioner of the district in which such land was situated, setting out details of the claim and the nature of the rights claimed. The details of the rights and titles had to be recorded publicly. The real impact of the GW Quieting Proclamation only became clear a few years later.
A special Land Court was established in Griqualand West through the Griqualand West Ordinance 3 of dated 9 September 26 to adjudicate on land claims in Griqualand West, which then had the status of a province.
Judgments or decrees of the Land Court were provisional for a period of three months to provide aggrieved parties with an opportunity to appeal to the High Court of Griqualand West. After the lapsing of the period of three months, application could be made to the Land Court to obtain a final judgment if an appeal had not been noted.
In Carter v Van Niekerk and Union Government Minister of Lands 29 the landowner of a farm riparian to the Vaal River instituted an action against Van Niekerk, a digger operating under a digger licence who had dug for and extracted diamonds from the half of the river bed adjoining the owner's farm, which the owner argued formed part of his land.
In the then President of the Orange Free State granted the farm in question to Carter's predecessors in title. The predecessors in title applied to the Land Court in terms of the GW Land Court Ordinance and obtained judgment on 19 June in which it was confirmed that the law of the Orange Free State applied to the land.
Approximately four years later on 15 July the Governor, without waiting for a demand or request from the landowners, proceeded to issue and register a title in respect of the land. The following condition was included in the title deed of 15 July That the issue of this title without any express reservation to the Government of its rights to all precious stones, gold or silver found on or under the surface of the land shall in no degree prejudice the position of the said Government in regard to the same.
Chief Justice Maasdorp remarked that the title was issued in the form of a new and original grant in perpetual quitrent without the reservation to the landowners of their rights under their "Free State title" or under the judgment of the Land Court and with the addition of the clause regarding the reservation of precious stones which did not form part of their original title or the judgment.
He held that in the case of an original quitrent grant of unalienated Crown land, the Government was entitled to reserve to itself as much of the ownership of such Crown land and of the rights attaching to the land as it wanted to, but it could not reserve to itself what belonged to the owner of the land that had already been alienated. The land in question was private property at the date of annexation of Griqualand West as part of the Cape Colony and it remained private property thereafter.
The Appellate Division held that the grant initiated by the Governor in had to be interpreted as conferring the same mineral rights as the Orange Free State title for which it was substituted.
Regarding the term "perpetual quitrent" Innes CJ stated as follows: That was a term in general use in South Africa to describe a tenure, the incidents of which might greatly vary. Upon the common law meaning it is not necessary to dilate; but that meaning had been fundamentally modified in different localities.
In the Cape it had become a form of ownership governed first by Sir John Cradock's Proclamation , and thereafter by the provisions of Act 14 of In the Free State it had evolved into a tenure which, as decided by the Privy Council, gave the minerals to the owner.
By Griqualand West Ordinance 3 of certain statutory incidents were assigned to it, which included a reservation of precious stones, gold and silver to the Crown. But that measure regulated the disposal of unalienated or waste lands; it was not intended to apply and could not apply to grants issued in terms of the quieting proclamation in substitution for Free State titles. The Appellate Division also referred to the position with regard to other farms along the Vaal River which had been originally held under Free State title and stated that the Cape Government was for a long time willing to rectify titles which purported to reserve mineral rights to the Crown.
After the annexation of the Griqualand West as part of the Cape Colony, the Cape Government, in an attempt to rectify the position, began to issue "clean titles" which clearly gave the minerals in the land to the landowner in exchange for titles that either reserved them to the Crown or purported to be without prejudice to any rights the Crown possessed. This practice was, however, discontinued after the Government had issued seventy-five "clean titles".
Prior to the issue of the GW Prospecting Proclamation there was no statutory provision in Griqualand West regulating the prospecting or searching for diamonds in respect of land that had not already been proclaimed as a diamond field. Before the commencement of the GW Prospecting Proclamation, a person who wanted to prospect on land that belonged to another person where no diamond field had been proclaimed, had to require the consent of the landowner.
The position was amended with the proclamation of the GW Prospecting Proclamation, but only in respect of private property. It firstly provided regulations for the payment of licences for prospecting on private property for precious stones, gold or silver. Secondly, it determined the rate of digging licences on such parts of the private property that had not previously been proclaimed as a public diamond field.
The term "private property" was not defined in the GW Prospecting Proclamation. There was no proviso that the term "private property" referred only to reserved private land. With reference to its first objective, section 1 of the GW Prospecting Proclamation provided that the Civil Commissioner of any district within which private property was situated would be entitled to issue a prospecting licence, authorising the holder thereof to prospect for the period of one month on any part of the relevant private property that was not a proclaimed diamond field.
There was no reference in the GW Prospecting Proclamation to the fact that any of the provisions of the GW Diggings Proclamation had been repealed. It is submitted that a person who wanted to prospect for diamonds on unreserved private land, would only have been entitled to obtain a prospecting licence regarding such land if it is with the consent of the landowner.
It is not clear why a landowner of unreserved private land would have been obliged to allow the holder of a prospecting licence to prospect for diamonds on his land if the landowner could not be compelled to consent to the establishment of diggings on his land. In the case of reserved private land, the consent of the landowner was not required to obtain a prospecting licence and the landowner could not exclude prospectors from his land.
A digger who found diamonds, gold or silver while prospecting under a prospecting licence was obliged to report the finding to the Civil Commissioner of the district. Thus, a person who found diamonds on Crown land was not entitled to the rights of a discoverer as provided in section 6 of the GW Prospecting Proclamation.
It is submitted that in the case of unreserved private land, the digger would only be entitled to be granted two claims if the landowner consented to the establishment of diamond diggings on his land under the GW Diggings Proclamation.
The previous position that applied under the GW Diggings Proclamation in terms of which the landowner was entitled to determine the rate at which digging licences would be issued, 49 was amended with the proclamation of the GW Prospecting Proclamation. The maximum amount for digging licences as determined by the landowner of unreserved private land was fixed at one pound per month.
Certain measures were adopted to protect the interests of landowners. An applicant for a prospecting licence was obliged to provide security for payment of twenty pounds sterling in the form agreed to by the Civil Commissioner in order to indemnify the landowner against any surface damage resulting from the prospecting operations.
There were also no similar restrictions in respect of the working of claims on proclaimed diamond fields. By the end of , the diggings known as De Beers, Kimberley, Bultfontein and Dutoitspan were divided into approximately full claims and many of them were further subdivided.
Thus, for the purposes of this article, it was unreserved private land. The three Commissioners were not successful in governing Griqualand West.
They were situated in the different districts of Klipdrift, Pniel and Griqua Town which made uniform government difficult.
They often held different and conflicting views on matters and were faced with numerous challenges, at the centre of which were the technological and operational problems that the diggers faced and with which legislation did not keep up.
Circumstances at the diggings in Griqualand West deteriorated. Allowing diggers to own individual claims, permitted the diggers to remove the soil within each claim at their own time, which often resulted in ground slides between adjoining claims since not all diggers worked their claims at the same rate. The diggers at Griqualand West were furthermore concerned that the main focus of the Government of the Cape Colony was on the farming industry and that laws adapted for agriculture such as those of Cape Town and the rest of the Cape Colony, were not suitable for the mining community of Griqualand West.
They desired a representative government situated in Griqualand West. On 30 November Sir Barkly cancelled the appointment of the three local Commissioners 65 and appointed Richard Southey as administrator with full authority to govern Griqualand West on his behalf. Southey issued two of the very first proclamations dealing with the mining of diamonds immediately after his appointment as Administrator of Griqualand West.
In the first Griqualand West Proclamation 2 of 31 January , he suspended the operation of sections 11 and 16 of the GW Diggings Proclamation until 15 March Southey viewed the "jumping" system as part of the rules emanating from the Diggers' Committees which prevented capitalist enterprise. In the second Griqualand West Proclamation 5 of 26 February , Southey appointed a Commission to report to him on the status of the diamond fields at Colesberg Kopje, De Beers, Dutoitspan and Bultfontein, together with the regulations under which the diamond fields were being worked.
The Commission was also instructed to recommend future measures for their management. They did, however, realise that the "jumping" system should be retained in one form or another to avoid that a small number of diggers dominate the diamond diggings. The Commission recommended that the "jumping" system be amended to provide that the forfeited claims could only be auctioned after a notice of demand had been given.
The diggers insisted that an election be held and that a representative government for Griqualand West be elected. The Government of Griqualand West would nominate the remaining four members. Southey was left with a casting vote and had the power to veto legislation.
The Province of Griqualand West passed its first ordinance, Griqualand West Ordinance 1 of on 30 January , in which the recommendations of the Commission were adopted.
It was stated in the preamble that Griqualand West Ordinance 1 of was passed, pending the passing of an ordinance for the better management of mines and diggings in Griqualand West. Section 16 of the GW Diggings Proclamation which provided for the "jumping" system, was not suspended with the result that claims would have lapsed if the holder thereof ceased bona fide to work the claims for a period of eight days. Almost three years after the proclamation of diamond fields on the farms Vooruitzigt, Dutoitspan and Bultfontein, the Legislative Council of the Province of Griqualand West passed Griqualand West Ordinance 5 of on 11 March in order to make provision for the repeal of the three earlier Proclamations establishing diamond fields on the privately owned farms Vooruitzigt, Dutoitspan and Bultfontein.
It was recorded in the preamble of Ordinance 5 of that doubts had arisen as to whether the three earlier Proclamations 78 had been duly and lawfully promulgated and further that the Government of the Griqualand West Province had been advised that the titles to the farms Vooruitzigt, Bultfontein and Dutoitspan were indeed subject to reservations of minerals and precious stones in favour of the Crown. These areas included the farms Vooruitzigt, Dutoitspan and Bultfontein. The proprietary status of the farms Vooruitzigt, Dutoitspan and Bultfontein later came under scrutiny in a number of cases before the High Court of Griqualand West.
The Government represented by Giddy, one of the Commissioners appointed in respect of Griqualand West pleaded that the farm Dutoitspan was held under perpetual quitrent and that it was therefore subject to a reservation of precious stones and minerals to the State as dominus directus of the soil and that all rights that formerly vested in the Government of the Orange Free State were vested in the British Crown.
The Government further contended that all payments which had been made to the landowners in terms of section 29 of the GW Diggings Proclamation had been made in error. It was common cause that the Government of the Orange Free State had previously granted the farm Dutoitspan to its first owner and that the following condition was contained in the initial grant:.
The Privy Council agreed with the judgment of the High Court of Griqualand West in which it was held that the landowner of the farm Dutoitspan was entitled to receive a portion of the licence fees as provided for in section 29 of the GW Diggings Proclamation.
On 13 May , the Legislative Council of the Province of Griqualand West adopted the Griqualand West Ordinance 10 of hereafter the GW Mining Ordinance 83 empowering the Governor of the Province of Griqualand West to make rules and regulations for the management of diggings and mines within the Province of Griqualand West 84 and to demand the payment of a prescribed sum of money from persons digging or mining for precious stones or minerals within the province.
General rules and regulations for the management of diggings and mines were included in a schedule to the GW Mining Ordinance and applied until the cancellation or amendment thereof. The GW Mining Ordinance was the first legislation in which the working of alluvial diggings and the mining of diamonds were separately regulated.
The GW Mining Ordinance repealed the GW Diggings Proclamation and all other legal enactments which may be repugnant or inconsistent with any of the provisions of the Ordinance. There are two possible interpretations of section 4 of the GW Mining Ordinance. The first is that the whole of the GW Diggings Proclamation was repealed. The second, which appears to be the correct interpretation, is that only those provisions that were inconsistent with the GW Mining Ordinance and its rules and regulations were repealed.
The question as to who was entitled to prospect for diamonds or to work claims in diggings or to mine for diamonds continued to depend on the specific form of land tenure. The rules and regulations contained in a schedule to the GW Mining Ordinance only applied in respect of Crown land and reserved private land and not in respect of unreserved private land.
Any person that wanted to prospect for diamonds 90 on Crown land or reserved private land 91 first had to register as a miner and had to take out a prospecting licence at the office of the Civil Commissioner. The discoverer, who discovered the diamonds under a prospecting licence, was entitled to select and to mark off the ground for his two claims. Notice was then given of a specific day on which claims would be allocated to certificated miners.
In the case of the discovery of a new digging 96 on Crown land or on reserved private land, the Inspector or Overseer 97 had to attend at the specific area for the purpose of registering the claim. After six months from the date of proclamation of a new digging, all new diggings were deemed to be established diggings.
There were also no transitional provisions to confirm that diggings, which were proclaimed in Griqualand West under the GW Diggings Proclamation on Crown land and on reserved private land, would be established diggings as contemplated in section 4 of the schedule to the GW Mining Ordinance. The GW Mining Ordinance further provided for the conversion of a digging into a mine. Every person of good character and older than sixteen years was entitled to obtain a miner's certificate from the Resident Magistrate for the relevant district.
A miner was entitled to the free and undisturbed possession of the claims registered in his name. All claims were issued subject to a servitude of not more than seven feet six inches on one side of each claim for purposes of a roadway.
Claims could be registered for periods of at least one month but not exceeding twelve months. Provision was made for the reservation of an area outside each claim for depositing ground, sifting or sorting soil and for machinery and staging.
Each miner was obliged to remove any stone, rubbish or other matter which he deposited in the reserved area and failure to do so could result in penalties. As stated above, a person who wanted to prospect for diamonds on Crown land and on reserved private land had to obtain a prospecting licence.
There was no requirement that the consent of the owner of reserved private land had to be obtained for the granting of the prospecting licence. The diggings on the farm Dutoitspan were converted to a mine known as the "Dutoitspan Mine". It is submitted that the de facto status of the diggings known as Colesberg Kopje, Old De Beer's and Dutoitspan, was that they were situated on unreserved private land and therefore not subject to the rules and regulations contained in the schedule to the GW Mining Ordinance.
They were, however, according to the Griqualand West Proclamation 7 of , which was issued a few days after the commencement of the GW Mining Ordinance, de jure proclaimed as public diamond fields.
0コメント