OSUN STATE UNIVERSITY
College of humanities and culture
IKIRE CAMPUS

HIS 301- HISTORY OF NIGERIA 1900-1960
GROUP 4- INDIRECT RULE
MEMBERS
1. OYEDELE OLUWASEUN HIS/2011/0042 2. BINUYO DAVID HIS/2011/0016 3. OGUNDIRAN SAMSON HIS/2011/0029 4. AKINYEMI AYOKUNMI HIS/2011/0054 5. ADEBAYO OLUWASEUN FRN/2011/0001 6. OLOYEDE OLUWASEUN ENG/2012/0016 7. AJANAKU ADETOUN HIS/2011/0009 8. DADA OLUWATOSIN HIS/2011/0018 9. BABASEYI OSAMU FRN/2011/0027 10. ELUBEKU TUNDE HISTORY 11. OLUBIYI TOMILOLA FRN/2011/0016 12. EBIRIM JOY HIS/2011/OO19 13. DAMILOLA FEMI HISTORY 14. ADEESO ADEDOYIN FRN/2012/0026 15. HAMZAT SEKINAT HIS/2012/0091 16. ASIFAT AISHAT FRN/2012/0022



INTRODUCTION
The Indirect Rule System was a system of administration which was based on the use of traditional authorities by the British officials. Indirect rule aims at a synthesis between European and African culture. The essence of indirect rule is that the present and the future are to be built on the past without any violent break; the loyalty of the people is to attach firstly to their traditional institutions.
In other words, the indirect rule is a system of administration in which the British colonial government made use of the paramount chiefs to govern the people of its colonies in accordance with their traditional political system, under the guidance and supervision of officials of the British government. The view is commonly held that Sir Fredrick Lugard was the father of indirect rule in Nigeria. Such a view implies that the system with which the British ruled the Southern Nigeria in the pre-Lugardian era by Governor MacGregor and Egerton from 1900 to 1912 was not one of indirect rule. In fact, Lucy Mair even goes to the extent of maintaining that indirect rule was deliberately not introduced into the Ibo country until after the Aba riots. Certain British administrative officer who wrote in the 1930’s not only imply that there was no indirect rule in the South but go as far as claiming that the system which was in operation prior to the tax riots of the late twenties was one of ‘direct rule’. The myth has therefore tended to grow that British rule in Southern Nigeria can be divided into two distinct periods- one of direct and the other of indirect rule. Al though, these arguments cannot be recounted here in this paper. The fact is that the respective British officers who took charge of the eastern and western provinces of Southern Nigeria recognized the importance of indigenous rulers in administration. Once the British had broken the spell of their supremacy our support was needed for their authority. To achieve this, the British colonial government was formed through three proclamations which guided both the conquered and the conqueror. The first of these proclamations the Native court proclamation was declared in 1900. This proclamation provided for court handled by the traditional heads and district heads to administer native non-European laws and practices. However, the British determined what constituted native law. The second was the native proclamation of 1906 and the native Authority proclamation of 1907.
It is to be noted that these proclamations were issued by Lugard in other to give legal baking and smooth running to indirect rule in Northern Nigeria. In the subsequent parts of this paper, we shall extensively discuss the reasons for the practice of Indirect rule, how the system was organized and practiced in the protectorate of Northern Nigeria and Southern Nigeria—Western and Eastern provinces. Also, there would be a critique analysis of indirect rule system and the merits /demerits of indirect rule.

REASONS FOR ITS ADOPTION As aforementioned, one of the aims of the British Government in Nigeria was to rule as far as possible through the chiefs and their councils. Why did British introduce the system of indirect rule?
The British argued that they were interested in protecting the traditional system. By the use of traditional rulers, they believed that the new administration would introduce few changes in society. But the main reason was economic. The colonialist wanted to create markets for their goods and to encourage Nigerian to produce those raw materials. The British had been hesitant about taking possession of large territories which would be expensive to administer. As we have seen it was avoid this expenses that the British had asked the chartered companies to administer the territories. Now that a formal annexation had taken place, it had become necessary for some administrative structure to be established. The British also had problems of finding sufficient personnel. Lugard at this period lacked staff for the direct administration of the country. To administer the vast areas of Nigeria, there was need for a large number of officials.
He was also short of money. He was therefore pleased to find that the Fulani Emirs had a well-organized system of government of their own. They had their own courts of law and Native Treasuries. They arranged for the collection of taxes and had their hierarchy of officials. In retrospect, the indirect rule system was adopted in Nigeria by Lord Lugard in order to reduce the problems posed by language. Lugard was aware that the people of Nigeria at that time did not speak nor understand English language and therefore going to through traditional rulers and chiefs to govern them would reduce the language problems. More so, poor transport, communication and postal system, etc prevented Britain from adopting a direct rule system; instead they opted for indirect rule system.
Poor climatic condition also aggravated the situation. Many British citizens refused coming down to Nigeria to be involved in administration due to poor climate and the presence of mosquitoes. Africa was nicknamed “the white man’s grave”, as a result of these factors.
And lastly the favorable political atmosphere in northern Nigeria at that period was favorable for the introduction of the system. The method of traditional administration at that time was very difficult for the British to displace the Emirs from that position so abruptly. The Emirs were respected by their people and the British did not want to attract the hatred of the people of northern Nigeria by disrupting the premier position occupied by the Emirs.

INDIRECT RULE IN NORTHERN NIGERIA
Because of the pre-eminent position of Lugard in developing the theory and practice of indirect rule, there has been the tendency to argue that he introduced indirect rule in Nigeria only in the North. It is pertinent to note that every part of Nigeria experienced indirect rule almost as soon as British rule was imposed. Therefore, the best statement on the matter is that Lugard introduced and practiced his own branch of indirect rule in Northern Nigeria and the rest of the country.
As the first high commissioner of the protectorate of northern Nigeria, it was his responsibility to issue directives or proclamations as earlier stated on how to administer the territory. At the local government level or what was called “Native Administration”, Lugard decided to use the indirect rule system in taking this decision; Lugard took a number of factors into consideration. These factors are thus the reasons why Lugard adopted the indirect rule system in the administration of northern Nigeria.

WHY IT WAS ADOPTED IN NORTHERN NIGERIA Generally, Lugard believed in the use of indigenous rulers in the administration of colonial territories. He had heard the experience of the system in both Uganda and India. Therefore, as the British political officers in charge of Northern Nigeria decided to acquire the system which relied on indigenous rulers in administering the territory. This means one of the factors which led to the adoption of indirect rule in Northern Nigeria was Lugard decision to do so. In the North, there are problems similar to those which faced the British political officers in the rest of the Nigeria namely—shortage of personnel, inadequate finance, communication problems, vastness of the territory and reluctant of the people to accept British rule.
Also the social and political organization of Nigeria made the possibility of indirect rule in the territory very real. In this sense, the indigenous socio-political organization in Northern Nigeria was a factor that contributed to the adoption of indirect rule. But we most stress that it is not through to argue that it was the cause or reason for the adoption of indirect rule in the territory.
After all, the system adopted elsewhere in Nigeria were similar sociopolitical organization did not exist. All it did was that it strengthened Lugard’s enthusiasm for indirect rule and facilitated its implementation in the area.
What then were the essential features of the indigenous social and political organization which contributed to the adoption of indirect rule in Northern Nigeria? Most of Northern Nigeria especially those parts that constituted the “SOKOTO CALIPHATE”.

INDIRECT RULE IN THE SOKOTO CALIPHATE The sokoto caliphate had a highly developed and efficient system of administration. The administration was centralized and territory was broken into units called emirates. Each emirates was a provincial unit headed by an emir who was responsible to the head of the caliphate—the caliph. Thus, it was relatively easy for Lugard to identify the rulers he had to deal with. Also, there was a reasonable clear financial system with a tax policy called the JANGALI. The people accepted the authority of the emirates and emirs to impose this tax. Similarly, there was a well established judiciary system based on the Sharia and utilizing Alkali courts. Those elements in the indigenous social and political organization of northern Nigeria were in relative terms conducive for the practice of indirect rule. Lugard, therefore had no reservation in adopting the system in northern Nigeria.

INDIRECT RULE IN WESTERN NIGERIA
As earlier discussed several factors contributed to the application of indirect rule in Nigeria which was the British desperate desire to win the cooperation of the people of Nigeria. There they thought it right to rule through the use of their people hence, the cooperation was guaranteed which helped to reduce friction and opposition to the administration and created a reliable bridge of reaching the people. Thus the indirect rule took different shape in different part of the country. Hence, it was a success in Northern part of the country and a partial success in the Western part of Nigeria.
Before 1914, the application of indirect rule in western Nigeria was based on CONCEALIA system in order to have the legal and easier administration with the creation of Native council ordinance in 1901which strengthen the position of the paramount chiefs e.g. Alaafin Oyo, Awoyale of Ijebu-ode Alake of Abeokuta e.t.c. This council was saddled with several responsibilities which include; legislative, judicial and executive functions, these bodies established laws and ensure it effectiveness, they were responsible for the construction of roads, sanitation, trade and agriculture. The judicial bodies include; law breakers, e.g murderers, they also settle land disputes and serves as court of appeal in certain cases. By 1914, the pertain of indirect rule changed in the western region, when Lugard became governor-general in 1914, he decided to introduce the pattern of indirect rule in northern region to western region which constitute Yorubaland, Irobo, western Ijo, Edo e.t.c. He changed the system by introducing three proclamations which ensures effectiveness. The proclamation includes; Native court ordinance, Native Authority ordinance and the Native Treasure ordinance, the native authorities created traditional rulers with supreme power just like the Emirs in the Northern region, the four great of Native court was also establish to keep peace and orderliness with the traditional rulers as the president. Also the residents and the district officers were headed by the Native authorities. Direct taxation was also introduced. Thus, the imposition of indirect rule in northern part on western region led to the challenges of indirect rule in western region. At first, Yoruba people did not support the supreme power that was placed on Obas which Emirs of the North had from the citizens. Also there were several rebellion on the introduction of direct taxation e.g. Iseyin rebellion of 1926 on the imposition of taxes. Also the Yoruba people began to accuse their leader of authoritarianism, the educated elites were not pleased with the position of the traditional rulers, they complained bitterly of been excluded from participating in the affairs of their land, this led to many protest e.g. Egbaland which led to protest against the system. There were also anti-tax riot of Warri in 1927. In conclusion, the indirect rule in western region prior to 1914 was a success but with the Lugardian system, there existed many tensions within the western region, also the British exercised much close control and supervision in the Yoruba area, in Irobo and Kwale Igbo, warrant chiefs were imposed on the people, this area complained bitterly against the new system which led to many revolt in different parts of the land, it can thus be said that Indirect rule was a partial success in Western region.

INDIRECT RULE IN IGBOLAND The Igbo were a politically fragmented group. Various sub-groups were organized by clans, lineage, village affiliation and dialects. There were not many centralized chiefdoms, hereditary aristocracy, or kingship customs except in kingdoms such as those of Nri, Arochukwu, Agbor and Onitsha. Many societies in Igbo land had never had chiefs or for that matter organized states. Therefore, this factor attributed to the failure of indirect rule in Igbo land. Also, among the Igbo people, indirect rule and its taxation system became a monumental disaster, a terrible burden, and in fact a quasi slavery experience for the freedom and democracy accustomed Igbo nation. Until the British Lord Lugard manufactured his tax scheme called Indirect rule, the Igbo hardly paid taxes to anybody, not to talk of a foreigner whom was just using power. The taxes that traditional Igbo communities had known from time immemorial were in the manner of occasional communal contributions with which maintained and executed communal projects. With the introduction of the tax system scheme in which the Igbo people sees it as a burden to them because initially the communal contribution was a voluntary action and was not imposed, made them to unite the fragmented semi-independent Igbo communities against the colonial administration. In addition, unlike the other parts of Nigeria like the Yoruba who had Obas and Northern part which had Emirs, this made it difficult for the rule to be a success in Igboland. Although, Lord Lugard appointed and imposed warrant chiefs on the people but this chiefs received little or no respect from the people and this made them not to cooperate with them. In conclusion, the indirect rule failed in Igbo land not only because of the factors that was mentioned above but also because Lugard did not have a good understanding of the traditional system of administration, and also because the existing traditional system was not suitable for the operation of the Indirect rule i.e. there was no centralized system of administration. With the imposition of this indirect rule, the Igbo people fought against the rule on behalf of other parts of Nigeria in which Nnamdi Azikwe was the spoke person in chief. CRITICISM OF INDIRECT RULE SYSTEM The indirect rule system was not accepted by most Nigerians for many reasons. First, it tended to strengthen the powers of traditional rulers. Because they derived their power from the British officials, the traditional rulers began to work harder to please the British more than the native people whom they were expected to represent. In essence the opportunity presented by the indirect rule system made them become corrupt and oppressive.
There were also cases in which the traditional rulers began to see themselves as errand boys of the British. In this capacity they lost the confidence of their people and became very unpopular. The greatest criticism of indirect rule system came from the educated elites who were excluded from participation in administration. They were joined in their criticism of the system by some of the British. The British critics argued that the unmodified traditional machinery was inadequate to meet modern needs. They believed the traditional system was resistant to the change and modernization which was required for the country. The major weakness of the indirect rule system was that it was base on false assumptions by the British who introduced it. It is clear that most of the officials did not fully understand the traditional institutions and systems. Very little use was made of the anthropologists. And the anthropologists, on their own side, relied heavily on interpreters and did not themselves have an adequate understanding of Nigerian societies. The consequence was that the system operated poorly and was poorly understood, which broke the traditional chains of communication, grievances could no longer be aired along normal lines and it was not unusual to witness riots and protests.

MERITS AND DEMERITS OF INDIRECT RULE SYSTEM Various African writers, historians, scholars, believed that the indirect rule system has contributed more negatively to the socio-political development of Nigerian societies. They are also of the opinion that previous Nigerian development was blunted, halted and turned back. In place of that interruption and blockade, nothing of compensatory value was introduced. Certainly, in relative terms, Nigeria’s position vis-à-vis its colonizers became more disadvantageous in the socio-political spheres.
However, the apologists of colonialism nay indirect rule maintained that the system was that of local government in colonial times. And that it contributed immensely to the developmental processes in Nigerian administration. These two conflicting schools of thought will be further explained as the merits [colonialist view] and demerits [afrocentric view] of the system, indirect rule;
MERITS
1. Respect for the people’s traditions and culture. 2. The use of the traditional rulers and chiefs in the administration made it less costly.
3. Indirect rule administration was a fertile ground for the training of traditional rulers and chiefs especially, in the area of local administration. 4. Indirect rule system was more accommodating than the French direct administration in West Africa. The former allowed the formation of political parties but the latter did not.
5. The indirect rule system helped to put a stop to some evil practices in some parts of the country. E.g. in the Eastern Nigeria, giving birth to twins were seen as an abomination. Also, human sacrifices were stopped. 6. Traditional institutions, native courts, etc were developed, making it more effective and durable.
7. It helped in introducing a new method of collecting taxes. 8. The political system was stable especially in the north, where the traditional rulers had the over-whelming support of the people.
DEMERITS
1. The greatest defect of the system was that it had little or no place for the educated elements who were not chiefs in the system. 2. The experiment of appointing artificial rulers where none traditionally existed, failed because it ran counter to the peoples’ customs. It also resulted in terrible abuses of power by such artificial chiefs. 3. The native rulers were deprived of effective power to defend the interests of their people against the British overlord. 4. Indirect rule was a system imposed on the people. Therefore the system was an imposition.
5. The democratic rights of the people were abused. People were denied of their rights.
6. Most of the traditional rulers were involved in evil practices and the system could not prosecute them. 7. Progress and development were relatively very low especially in northern Nigeria. So development was retarded.
8. The system had no universal application because it could not be applied to all environments.
9. The system encouraged tribalism and sectionalism at the expense of national consciousness. That was why other parts of Nigeria did not want independence while others were clamoring for it.
10. Above all, the system failed to prepare the people for modern representative government or to develop in them a new sense of national identity.

CONCLUSION In this unit, you had the historical analysis of Nigerian states during the colonial era. You were informed that the democratic rights of people were abused and that the success of indirect rule system in other countries made Lugard to introduce same in Nigeria.
The indirect rule system succeeded in some parts of Nigeria and did not succeed in other parts. The reason was that the areas that had a centralized political structure were easier to govern by the colonial masters, than those areas which had decentralized political structure. It is necessary to emphasize that Indirect Rule was not a system of local government in colonial times. It was rather a concept of local government. The main attribute of that concept was the willingness on the part of the colonial power to accommodate the ways of life, the laws and customs of the subject people a willingness which led to using native agencies for local government purposes in such a way that they possessed a measure of clearly recognizable power. Native authorities, native courts, native treasuries, Lugardian fashion, were a particular systematization of that concept. They did not in themselves constitute Indirect Rule.

REFERENCES/FURTHERREADING i. Obaro Ikime, Reconsidering Indirect Rule: The Nigerian Example, Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria, Vol. 4, No.3, 1968. ii. Ajayi J.F, Tradition and Change in Africa: The Essays of J.F Ade-Ajayi, Trenton: Africa World Press, 2000. iii. Walter Rodney, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa 2009 ed., Abuja: Panaf Publishing, 2005. iv. T. Falola et al, History of Nigeria 3: Nigeria in the Twentieth Century, Lagos: Learn Africa Plc, 1991. v. E. A Keay, H. Thomas, West African Government for Nigerian Students, 3rd ed., London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd, 1986. vi. Tarikh: Indirect Rule in British Africa, Vol. 3, No.3, Longman, 1970. vii. Obaro Ikime, (ed) Groundwork of Nigerian History, Heinemann, 1980. viii. Dibie C.C, Essential Government, Ogun: Tonad Publishers, 2008. ix. Edwin W. Smith, Indirect Rule in Nigeria: Miss Perham’s Great Book, Journal of the Royal African Society, Vol. 36, No. 144, pp. 371-378, Oxford University Press, (Jul., 1937).