Talk:William Jervis Livingstone

Lismorelady bias

The contributor Lismorelady made six edits in 2015 the majority of which are neither impartial nor well sourced (if sourced at all). It is unclear if this contributor is related to W J Livingstone or if the connection is merely that, like him, they are from or connected with Lismore Island, but those edits relating to Livingstone’s time in Nyasaland are an attempt to whitewash his reputation and shift the blame for his activities to his employer. The same contributor has also made edits favourable to him in a number of other articles where he is mentioned.

Most of the information about Livingstone’s activities as manager of the Magomero Estate comes from around half-a-dozen academic historians, principally Lanteg White. These, using contemporary records, describe several instances of Livingstone physically abusing Africans himself, and directing estate foremen to whip workers and tenants deemed to be slacking. The Magomero Estate under his management made tenant farmers including single women and widows work for long hours over five or six months a year in lieu of rent when two months’ work for male tenants only was usual, and all of which were illegal. These abuses stemmed from the introduction of cotton, which required very intensive cultivation, as the estate’s main crop from 1903 onward.

The suggestion that Livingstone only acted under the orders of Alexander Livingstone Bruce is without foundation. William Jervis Livingstone was appointed manager in 1893, about the time that the original owner, Alexander Low Bruce, died leaving the Magomero estate to a trust set up for his two sons with his wife as principal trustee until her death in 191Sscoulsdon (talk) 08:31, 17 April 2017 (UTC)2. At that time, Alexander Livingstone Bruce was a 12-year old schoolboy living in Edinburgh with his widowed mother, neither of whom were in a position to control William Jervis Livingstone’s activities in Nyasaland. Alexander Livingstone Bruce only moved to Magomero in 1908, fifteen years after William Jervis Livingstone became manager, and he did not assume full control until 1913 when A L Bruce Estates Ltd bought Magomero from the A L Bruce trust after the death of his mother. Even then, White quotes Alexander Livingstone Bruce as suggesting William Jervis Livingstone had a free hand in the day-to-day running of the estate

The contributor also made a number of questionable remarks about the motivation of Livingstone, John Chilembwe and others without any sources quoted and other comments which are far from impartial. These edits need a critical examination and, where necessary revision.Sscoulsdon (talk) 16:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

On specific points raised in the edits:

1. Was William Jervis Livingstone murdered? It seems very likely that he was unlawfully killed without justification or excuse and with malice aforethought, as in the common law definition of murder that applied in 1915. However, there was no inquest bringing in a verdict of murder and no trial or conviction for his murder (two of his probable killers were summarily executed for armed rebellion) and all the sources, including the Nyasaland Government’s Commission of Enquiry refer to his killing, not murder. It seems safer to retain killing

2. Relationship to David Livingstone. William Jervis Livingstone is believed to be distantly related to David Livingstone, but the exact relationship, if any, is unclear. Lismorelady says this cannot be proven because many records were burned after the 1745 rebellion. She adds, “What is known is likely” is that a John Livingstone was their common antecedent, although no source is given. A John Malcolm Livingstone, said to have been born in Inverness and to have died at the Battle of Culloden in 1746 is shown in one source as the great-grandfather of David Livingstone (Geni), but two other sources (Ancestry.co.uk and Clan Mac Lea/Livingstone Forum) suggest David Livingstone’s ancestry can at best be traced back to his grandfather, Neil Livingstone of Ulva, who resettled in Blantyre, South Lanarkshire in 1792, and that David Livingstone’s claim of a great-grandfather (who he does not name) being killed at Culloden is unproven. The family of William Jervis Livingstone lived on Lismore for several generations, and his great-great-grandfather is shown as Douglas MacOnlea of Lismore who died in 1730 (Geni). He married a Mary Livingstone (ancestry unknown), and their descendants adopted the surname Livingstone.

Geni: John Malcolm Livingstone https://www.geni.com/people/John-Livingstone/6000000034617364831

Ancestry.co.uk: Neil Livingstone https://www.ancestry.co.uk/genealogy/records/neil-livingstone_125147154

Clan Mac Lean/Livingstone Forum (2010) Dr David Livingstone’s Grandparents http://www.clanlivingstone.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1038 Sscoulsdon (talk) 07:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC) Geni: John Malcolm Livingstone https://www.geni.com/people/Baron-Douglas-MacOnlea/6000000000816036008

3. Responsibility of the Estate owner. The "actual owner" of the Magomero estate in 1915 was not Alexander Livingstone Bruce, as Lismorelady supposes, but A L Bruce Estates Ltd, of which Bruce owned 40% of the shares. Alexander Livingstone Bruce arrived Magomero in 1908, fifteen years after William Jervis Livingstone was appointed manager in 1893 and did not assume full control until 1913 when, after the death of Alexander Livingstone Bruce’s mother A L Bruce Estates Ltd bought Magomero from the trust set up by his father. In 1893, Alexander Livingstone Bruce was a 12-year old schoolboy and not in a position to control William Jervis Livingstone’s activities, and it is clear that his mistreatment of estate worker and tenant farmers began before Alexander Livingstone Bruce’s arrival. Bruce allowed these abuses to continue, and was responsible to that extent, but this does not clear Livingstone of blame. The suggestion that he was an employee that had to obey his employer’s orders has to be weighed against Livingstone remaining as manager to 21 years, including seven years after Bruce’s arrival, when he would have been free to leave that employment, had he wished. In contrast, as many of the estate tenants were Mozambican immigrants, if they had left the estate, they would be unable to find other land to cultivate and risked deportation

4. Change of "violent" to "hot-tempered" and removal of evidence of Livingstone’s abuse. White describes several instances of Livingstone's physical brutality to Africans, including his conviction for an unprovoked assault in 1900, and the government sub-Resident of Chiradzulu sub-district recorded his maltreatment of workers from the start of that decade. Although Lismorelady claims that corporal punishment was fairly widespread at the time, including the UK, it was generally of children at school or in the home or juvenile criminals. By 1900, the judicial flogging of adults was limited in Britain to a few serious offences, mainly those against prison discipline by convicted inmates. What Livingstone did would have been equivalent to a British landowner flogging an estate worker or a tenant farmer or ordering it, so any comparison with UK practice at that time is seriously misleading. Lismorelady, for no valid reason, also deleted the quote from Rotberg that that the workers and tenants at Magomero questioned by the Commission of Enquiry confirmed that Livingstone routinely beat them or ordered their flogging.

5. Was Livingstone scapegoated? Lismorelady suggests that the Commission of Enquiry was an attempt by the Nyasaland administration to blame Livingstone as he could offer no defence. This ignores the evidence given, not only by officials but by fellow planters and estate worker and tenant farmers that the regime at Magomero was not merely oppressive but also illegal, and had been recognised as such for many years. Alexander Livingstone Bruce, who was a member of the Governor’s Legislative Council, was not censured by the Commission, even though, as a director of A L Bruce Estates Ltd, he should have borne responsibility for the illegal and oppressive conditions the company imposed. However, this would not have cleared Livingstone of his responsibility as manager.

6. Kitty Livingstone’s defence. Lismorelady emphasises Kitty Livingstone’s defence of her husband while deleting more credible evidence of his wrongdoing. In contrast, White presents a more nuanced picture of some acts of kindness balanced against an oppressive working environment. As his charity to the hungry is emphasised, its limits need to be examined. White noted that, in the 1911-13 semi-famine, Livingstone distributed food to some headmen, often Muslim ex-soldiers appointed by him to control the mainly migrant estate workforce: there is no suggestion of widespread food distribution. Against this, Livingstone’s practice of making tenants of both genders work for long hours for up to six months a year in lieu of rent, mostly in the rainy season when they needed to plant food crops, and underpaying other workers or giving them tobacco instead of cash or food rations made them less able to resist famine if it came.

While Lismorelady may have written with good intentions, she did so without adopting a neutral point of view, rejecting reliable sources and presenting her own opinions as fact. In particular, it gives undue weight to issues favourable to William Jervis Livingstone while ignoring or deleting reliably-sourced issues that are unfavourable to him. Sscoulsdon (talk) 07:09, 17 April 2017 (UTC) Sscoulsdon (talk) 08:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm ... so the solution proposed after all that is to negate the favourable first-hand sources in favour of the unfavourable (many of which are contemporary academics) ... yep, that sounds reasonable! Flogging incidentally was widespread within tribal culture at the time and is still permissible in domiciles and private schools in Malawi so I guess "violent" or "hot-tempered" people are still enabled/accomodated by the Government of Malawi!

2001:8003:70F5:2400:8470:7FF9:5765:F4F2 (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Anguru

Aeusoes 1 has altered the description of Anguru from ""Anguru", a term used to describe a number of different Lomwe speaking migrants from Mozambique" to "Lomwe-speaking migrants from Mozambique called "Anguru."" in the grounds that "term used to describe" was redundant.

This is incorrect, as the significance of "a term used to describe a number of different Lomwe speaking migrants" is that "Anguru" is not the name of a specific people, but a term used by Europeans to lump together people whose only similarity was they spoke one of several Lomwe language. It was not a term used by the people themselves or other Africans (i.e. the majority), and it had derogatory overtones.

I'm undoing the edit as the original words were not redundant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shscoulsdon (talk • contribs) 15:42, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but unfortunately the way the article is currently worded obscures these features of the term and even implicitly endorses this apparently problematic category. I will make another stab at revising the text in a manner that addresses both of our concerns. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 17:37, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aeusoes 1: I've seen your tweaking and am pleased to support it.

Sscoulsdon (talk) 05:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Justification for murder?

Most of this article appears to be an effort to justify the murder of Livingstone and the other persons. Can somebody explain this in terms that normal people can understand as all I got from the article was that he was a hard taskmaster and therefore he and his associates deserved death? Also John Chilembwe was a Christian pastor who persuaded his followers to commit murder on false pretences (and apparently what comes across from the article is that this is a morally superior position). As a further curiosity could a Christian pastor volunteer to explain in the article the religious significance of a Christian pastor (Chilembwe) preaching next to Livingstone's severed head? 2001:8003:70F5:2400:8470:7FF9:5765:F4F2 (talk) 06:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)