ABSTRACT
Introduction I argued in chapters 3 and 4 that preference for Bororo Fulani cattle owners because of their contribution to the colonial economy through cattle taxes (jangali) was the underlying reason why British colonial authorities allowed them to settle (with their cattle) the grazing ranges of Bamenda. From the onset, cattle grazing introduced conflict between Fulani pastoralists and local farmers in the region and before long, the conflict began to center more on ownership of the ranges. Unwilling to take any action that would minimize revenues from jangali, British authorities began thinking of separating pastoralists and farmers over territorial space and granting security of tenure to the Fulani as a solution to the problem. This chapter unveils the intrigues and arguments used by the British to mask their avowed intention of settling the Fulani, permanently, on the grazing ranges of the region without consulting indigenous chiefs, many of whom believed that the British pursued a pro-Fulani policy. The British policy was pro-cattle; it was anxiety over rising revenues from jangali that caused British colonizers to attempt to flout native laws and customs, using strategies such as the grant of certificates of occupancy (COO) and unwarranted boundary demarcations under the InterTribal Boundaries Settlement Ordinance (ITBSO) to establish security of land tenure for Fulani pastoralists. Permanent settlement for Fulani pastoralists was another issue that preoccupied British authorities throughout their tenure in the region. My conclusions stand to reinforce arguments made by other scholars of colonial Africa – that European colonizers were always ready to favor groups that facilitated their goal of economic exploitation.
