to pay more, a fact which was aggravated by the high cost of living that affected all lower income groups in the country at the time. They stressed that in spite of this rise in the cost of living and the increase in the wages of white workers, those of African workers had remained practically unchanged.
The township spokesman further argued that in this particular case the operator (PUTCO) was not a private company or individual whose only aim was to make profits, but a public corporation enjoying government support and established for the purpose of providing the public with an efficient and cheap transport service. They denounced the existing fare as beyond the means of the ordinary worker and pointed out that the proposed increase would be oppressive. They added if the service was running at a loss, the duty of the corporation was not to squeeze that loss from those who could not pay, but from those who could the government or industry and commerce. It was also pointed out to the corporation that the distance between the township and the city was comparatively short and did not at all warrant the increase. The whole issue rested on economic considerations the people's inability to pay.
The people had a powerful case and, in any other country, the corporation would either have completely yielded or compromised. But not so in our country. Here all the good things are as far as possible reserved for the whites while the blacks are condemned to a life of hardship and misery. The government, public corporations, the transport system, industry and commerce, are all run by whites for the benefit of whites. This is the basic premise from which we should attempt to analyze
Hide TranscriptShow Transcript