The Fallacies of J. B. Danquah's Heroic Legacy

(Part III)

During a public forum at the University of Ghana at Legon marking the 100 Days of Dr. K. A. Busia’s administration, Dr Jones Ofori Atta, then Deputy Minister of Finance, in his presentation repeatedly attacked and addressed the Opposition Leader, Dr. George Agama as Mr. Agama. The Legon students, mostly Progress Party supporters, booed Dr. Jones Ofori Atta to the extent that Nene Azu Marte Kole, a leading PP member, walked out of the lecture hall. Sadly, Dr. Ofori Atta’s kind of arrogance surfaced immediately after Mr. J. A. Kufuor won the presidential election on January 28, 2001. As such, some NPP fanatics have formed the habit of reducing MATTERS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE to blind, ethnic chauvinism and name-calling. Instead of disputing facts presented in articles, some would get into semantics and/or argue about the style of presenting some straightforward historical data of national importance to the general public. But, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “standing for what is right” and “telling the truth may mean carrying the Cross.” Indeed, Kwame Nkrumah and his followers were insulted, ridiculed, physically attacked and called all sorts of names. Krobo Edusei and others in the Asante province, for instance, were called “traitors, quislings, and fifth columnists,” for supporting Nkrumah. After the birth of the NLM, the Kumawuhene and some CPP leaders in Asante had to flee to the Colony, especially Accra for refuge (Awoonor, 1990). In Akyem Abuakwa, some “immigrant” farmers in some of the smaller towns closer to Kyebi had to flee for their lives. In the March 6, 1956 edition of the NLM paper, “Liberator,” the CPP was referred to as a group of “homeless tramps and jackals.” But, the more the Danquah-Busia camp resorted to name-calling, brute politics and physical attacks, the more the intelligent people of Ghana rallied behind Nkrumah’s CPP and its nationalist agenda. Alas, after the Harlley-CIA conspired coup of February 1966, Kwame Nkrumah’s eighty year-old mother (almost blind) was dragged to the Commission of Enquiry in an attempt to force her at gun point “to say that Nkrumah was not her real son” (Kanu, 1982). So, as my admiration for her bold refusal to yield to the heartless acts of the Danquah-Busia acolytes, and as a salute to Major-General Barwah, who was butchered for his heroic refusal to betray the Black Race, I will not nor will other like-minded people be deterred by the name-calling and harebrained personal attacks by a tiny minority from writing on Ghana’s political history.

Asamankese &Tafo Vrs. Ofori Atta I-Danquah Dynasty. As indicated in my last article, it was during the reign of Osagyefo Ofori Attah I that corruption and extortion in the tribunals became the most direct form of exploitation the commoners had ever experienced; tribunal fees and fines collected “were frequently excessive and divided on the spot among the tribunal members” (Simensen, 1975). Hence, King Kwaku Amoah of Asamankese revolted and declared his non-allegiance to Ofori Atta in 1921 (Addo-Fening, 1975; Simensen, 1975). Having always “harboured a spirit of independence in his relations with the Omanhene,” the corruption and extortion also prompted the Tafohene, Adusei Peasah II, to repudiate the validity of all leases bearing Ofori Atta’s signature; this, in effect, challenged Ofori Atta’s political authority (Simensen, 1975). As Osabarima Adusei Peasah IV told me, Tafo attempted to create an independent Akyem Awansa State, out of the towns and villages under its authority (also see Simensen). Yet, in his February 4, 1952 letter to Seth Appiah of the Akim Abuakwa Youth Association, the “nationalist” Dr. J. B. Danquah bragged about Akyem Abuakwa as “the largest State in the Colony (and so) must also be the greatest in the Land.” He added, “I am determined to have the Abuakwa name rehabilitated and make Abuakwa lead the nation” (Danquah, Vol. III, 1972). Nevertheless, how or with whom were Ofori Atta II and Danquah going to turn Akyem into a federal state or secede from the province, especially when Danquah lost the 1954 and 1956 general elections?

J. B. Danquah: From UGCC to NLM.

Because of his royal affinity, Dr. J. B. Danquah was able to improve the apprehensive and discomfited relations between the intelligentsia and the Joint Provincial Council of Chiefs. As a result, Danquah and Rev. C. C. Baeta were, in 1946, elected as Provincial Members of the Legislative Council, composed “of the elite and wealthy Chiefs” (Reindorf, 1966). Meanwhile, two pressure groups, the Gold Coast League and Gold Coast National Party surfaced to pressure the Colonial Government for import licenses for the African merchants and power sharing. These groups would later merge to become the United Gold Coast Convention at Saltpond in 1947, under the chairmanship of George Grant, a wealthy Merchant of Sekondi. The membership comprised lawyers (Danquah included), merchants, conservative “chiefs” and wealthy cocoa farmers, whose main interest was to advance their economic interest through the sharing of political power with the Colonial Government (Awoonor, 1990; Krafona, 1986). This elitist group took politics to be a leisurely activity. Hence, they needed Kwame Nkrumah’s kind of leadership to iron out the differences between the two ethic groups and organize the movement. But, while in prison for the 1948 uprisings, Danquah said that he would not have endorsed the recommendation by Dr. Ako Adjei, had he (Danquah) known of Nkrumah’s ideological persuasion. Danquah’s regret for writing to invite Nkrumah to assume the office of the General Secretary of the UGCC was to have a deep psychological effect on him, so much so that he and his followers would resort to any means possible, including violence, to eliminate Nkrumah from the political scene in the country. So, when Nkrumah broke away from the UGCC and organized the 1950 Positive Action, Danquah responded to it as follows: “It is obvious that the law, as far as Kwame Nkrumah is concern, must go according to him. In my opinion that those who go against [colonial] constitutional authority must expect to pay it with their neck” (Nkrumah, 1957). Next, Danquah’s instant joy over the arrest of Nkrumah and other CPP leaders ended with the expression, “pataku (wolf) had been driven away” (Nkrumah, 1957). Ironically, it was the same Danquah who, in 1947, happily assured the people at a mass rally in Accra that “Kwame Nkrumah will never fail you.” On this promise, Dr. Danquah was right. Kwame Nkrumah later embarked on the motto: “One Nation, One People, One Destiny” in order to unify the four fragmented territories as one country by 1951. Henceforth, Nkrumah would successfully strengthen his nationwide political party to defeat the forces of separatism and devolution, which were launched against the CPP’s nationalist agenda.

During the debate of the 1951 Local Government Ordinance, J. B. Danquah argued that state control of the Cocoa Marketing Board was “in direct violation of the full enjoyment of private property” (Danquah, Vol. II, 1972). Similarly, the National Liberation Movement argued in 1956 that the money which the cocoa farmers were “pouring into Government’s coffers was being used in developing the coastal region. The NLM’s other complaint was that the CPP government had used the resources of the Cocoa Marketing Board to give low interest loans to farmers. Obviously, “the poorer farmers and those looking for government development that would open up more land for farms,” backed the CPP. The government policy thus deprived the wealthy farmers including some of the traditional rulers in the Asante province who had for long run a lucrative “business by lending (money) to the poorer farmers” (Bing, 1968). Accordingly, the Asante “cocoa farmers would be better off if they would manage their own affairs” (Ninsin, 1991). As such, “the wealthy farmers lined up with the chiefs and to give the ‘Committee for Higher Cocoa Prices’ a more ethical look, it was transformed into the ‘National Liberation Movement.” They did not want their movement to be called “Party,” since “party politics were contrary to the tenets of traditional rule.” And “as a price for their support they insisted it should embrace feudalism and also thus propose the redivision of the country into its old provinces, which had existed as almost separate entities in the heyday of the indirect rule” (Bing, 1968). Interestingly, the biggest contributor to the cause of the NLM was Cadbury and Fryer of Britain. I must add that “the Chief of Adanse alone gave £1,000.00 toward the third aeroplane that Ashanti Confederacy contributed as its gifts (to Britain) for the prosecution of the war” (Busia, 1951). Likewise, revenue from cocoa export and levy on the World War II fund were voted by the Akyem Abuakwa State Council, with Danquah as the legal advisor, to finance the Akyem Abuakwa contingent of the British Volunteer Royal Force during the military occupation of East Africa. If, therefore, there was nothing wrong with the Wealthy “Chiefs” of Asante and Ofori Atta II to demonstrate their loyalty to the British Government by generous contributions to the second imperialists War Fund, what was wrong with the CPP government using some of the cocoa farmers’ money to develop the coastal region, especially the Tema Harbor and its industrial city, University of Ghana, Akosombo Project etc.? The question is, would the control of the cocoa industry by the foreign companies like Cadbury and Fry have led to the building of the KNUST, Okomfo Anokye Hospital or Ofori Panin Secondary School etc.? The answer is, NO.

During the electioneering campaign of 1956, the NLM supporters in the central Akyem Abuakwa constituency quoted the Omanhene Ofori Atta II as saying that there would be no peace in the country if the CPP won the election. In fact, fears were constantly put into the people (this author, then a child, also heard it) that the CPP strongholds in Akyem Abuakwa would be destroyed by the “oprem” (cannons) in front of the Omanhene’s palace. In my village Ettokrom, twelve miles away from Dr. Danquah’s hometown, his few supporters vowed publicly that if the NLM emerged victorious, all “stranger settlers” would be chased out of Akyem leaving their cocoa farms behind; in addition, they vowed that the Akyemfoo CPP supporters would also be made to plant their plantains inside their houses. We the children from Ettokrom, who had to walk from Ettokrom to attend primary school at Osiem at the time would run to hide in the bush, anytime we heard the resounding horns of the NLM’s Peugeot caravans. All the same, the people in the Akyem Abuakwa Central, comprising cocoa farmers, agricultural laborers, some traditional rulers and scholars, saw Dr. J.B. Danquah as an arrogant, ethnocentric elite. Consequently, my Grandfather, the Chief Cocoa Farmer in the area, admonished us little children in 1956 for going to the Odikro’s palace to listen to Danquah, whom he described as “a black-white man that boasts of his eloquence in the white man’s language and wears suits whenever he visits the area.” In fact, the Odikro’s Okyeame proudly introduced Danquah to us children and two adults present as a highly British-educated black man, “who speaks the English language (brofo) for the white man to nod his head.” In fact, Danquah’s elitism was manifested in his distaste and contempt for “this thing of masses,” whom he viewed as “only individuals” and dismissed their aspirations as “emotions” (Wright, 1954). Just before the 1956 election, the NLM gave a strong warning to the British government of the dire consequence if Ghana should attain independence under the CPP administration (Botwe-Asamoah, 2005). Hence, after losing the election, the Danquah-Busia’s parochial “NLM and Northern People’s Party sent a resolution to the Secretary for Colonies” in Britain, “demanding separate independence for Asante and the Northern Territories” (McFarland and Owusu Ansah, 1995). But after Dr. Busia’s fiasco in London to halt the independence of Ghana, the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Agyemang Prempeh II reconciled with Nkrumah for the good of the country, and became an “open supporter of the CPP” (Bing, 1968). That, to me, was a mark of a great King. Nonetheless, judging from the threats of Danquah and the NLM, the 1966 coup was the culmination of the Opposition’s long struggle to topple the Kwame Nkrumah government by any means possible. Certainly, the coup was designed to return Ghana to the claws of its former imperialist Britain and its allies, as desired by Dr. J.B. Danquah. In his March 6, 1944 speech marking the centenary of the infamous Bond of 1844, Danquah expressed his unflinching desire to place a self-governing Ghana under the British empire. He said: “I AM SOMETIMES MUCH SURPRISE WHEN I SEE MANY OF MY COUNTRYMEN TERRIFIED BY THE USE OF THAT WORD, ‘SELF-GOVERNMENT.’ THEY ARE TERRIFIED OF IT BEACUSE THEY THINK IT MEANS THE DESIRE TO BREAK AWAY FROM THE [BRITISH] EMPIRE AND BECOME INDEPENDENT OF THE BRITISH. IF IT COMES TO THAT, IF IT COMES TO A DECION TO BREAK AWAY FROM THE BRITISH CONNECTRION, I WOULD BE THE LAST [PERSON] TO EXPRESS SUCH A TERRIFIC WISH” (see the Historic Speeches of J. B. Danquah). This was why Danquah would later condemn the 1948 uprising following the ex-servicemen’s march as “an act of treachery.” His telegram to the British Government concerning the same uprising ended with the words, “God Save the (British) King” (Awoonor 1990). What a Compatriot Saint of Ghana!

Indeed, imposing Dr. J. B. Danquah on the nation as “A Compatriot Saint of Ghana” is justifying the shooting of Sgt. Adjeitey and his comrades on February 28, 1948.

Correction in Part II. Sub-Heading: “The Tyrannical Rule of Ofori Atta...” Line 24-25 should read: “major uprising in Asamankese” and not Akyem Kotoku.

Kwame Botwe-Asamoah, Ph. D.
Professor of African and African American History
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260

Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.