The Sentencing of A.A.S. Le Fleur, 1898 Last Stand Griqua Rebellion

The 1898 “Last Stand” Rebellion in the Eastern Cape was, in the words of Mr. Justice Jones, a “mad rebellion.” Poorly armed, numerically small, and militarily hopeless, it ended with almost no bloodshed except the death of Mr. Kyd. Yet the trial and sentencing of its leader, Andrew Abraham Stockenstroom Le Fleur, reveals much about colonial law, political dissent, and the historical memory of the Griqua people. The court record, and especially the list of convicted men published by the Kokstad Advertiser, remains a valuable historical document of Griqua participation and identity at the turn of the century.

Contemporary commentary welcomed the government’s decision to try Le Fleur under “ordinary law” rather than the Suspicions Act passed in the previous parliamentary session. The Kokstad Advertiser noted: “Had they done so they would have remained under the suspicion that their case against him was bad. They have, however, secured a conviction under the ordinary law, thus showing that the Suspicions Act was not required.” The implication was clear: using emergency legislation would have suggested political prosecution rather than judicial proof. By securing a conviction in open court, the state affirmed the legitimacy of its legal process, even as it called for the repeal of the Suspicions Act in the next session.

Colonial Law and Legitimacy

In sentencing Le Fleur, Mr. Justice Jones acknowledged that “there may have been some complaints, some grievances, which no doubt some Natives and some Griquas felt.” The judge insisted that lawful remedies existed: “If you had a legal right you could go to this court of justice which goes round the country twice a year, and you could appeal… to the Governor.” From the bench, the rebellion was not a rational political act but a failure to use existing institutions.

Justice Jones described the uprising in stark terms: “A number of men went out on the veldt with you with a few assegais, a few quince sticks, some peach sticks, and expected that they were going to carry on war against the Government, which can command hundreds of thousands in the field. A more ridiculous thing I don’t think I have ever heard of.” He stressed the potential for “frightful murders” even though the rebellion “ended without the shedding of blood except that of Mr. Kyd’s.”

Framing Rebellion as Irrational

Balancing that lack of carnage against Le Fleur’s role as “the ringleader,” the sentence was designed to deter future unrest: “The sentence of the Court must be one which will deter any one in the future from taking up the position you now occupy.” Le Fleur received fourteen years’ imprisonment with hard labour.

The Kokstad Advertiser preserved an analysis of the sentences that is now invaluable to historians. It names the “puny rebels” and distinguishes between terms of imprisonment, revealing the scale and composition of the movement.

Sentences and Named Participants

Fourteen years with hard labour: Andrew Abraham Stockenstroom Le Fleur.
Six years: Mkwitshi, Mtoli, Kambokwe, Ngovolo.
Five years: Cornelius Kok, Johannes Bezuidenhout, Arie Steenkamp, January Kok, Johannes Msengeni, Ncapayi, Johannes Steenkamp, Klaas Pienaar, Piet Voster, Nicholas Coetzee, Jan Pienaar (Abel’s son), David Pienaar, Olivier, Pienaar junior, Kok, Nicholas Pienaar, Rudolf van Wyk, alias Boshoff, Jacobus Johannes Olivier, Klass Pienaar, alias Babatyies, Fulafula.
Four years: Madonela; Mahlungulu.
Three years: Willem de Vries, Willem Bezuidenhout, Isaac Holby, Nontangana, Jacob Abrams, Mabatuza, David Titisi, Ram, Somveli, Toll Diedrick, Rulf van Wyk, Paul Olivier, Luboyi, Gert Karse, Jan Pienaar, sen., Ngcaleka, Adrian Bezuidenhout, Makouzo, Fortuin Kok, Mqubo, Hendrick Diedrick, Nomzaza, Mashiyane, Jan Pienaar (Piet’s son), Mahapi, Khomatu, Jan Pienaar, jun., Mgobo, Andries Bussack, alias Jim Spier.
Acquitted: Jacob, Jim, Pape, Suma, Sigodla, Lauw, Hathorne.

Griqua Identity in Records

This roll of names is more than a legal footnote. It is one of the clearest surviving records of Griqua political engagement in the 1890s. Surnames like Kok, Pienaar, Steenkamp, Bezuidenhout, and Olivier appear repeatedly, mapping kinship networks and community leadership. The presence of Xhosa names such as Mkwitshi, Ngovolo, and Nontangana alongside Griqua families shows the rebellion was not ethnically isolated but drew on broader regional grievances.

For descendants and scholars, the list transforms abstract references to “the Griquas” into specific individuals who chose to follow Le Fleur onto the veldt with “a few assegais” and peach sticks. Their sentences, ranging from three to fourteen years, quantify the colonial state’s judgment of culpability, with Le Fleur bearing the heaviest burden as organiser and persuader.