J. H. de Waal Malefijt — a Dutch Anti-Revolutionary politician — served as minister of Colonies (1913-1918) in the Heemskerk wartime cabinet. He is the principal anti-revolutionary executor of the ethical-policy program in the post-pacificatie period and the principal parliamentary antagonist of Kuyper in the 1911 begrotingsdebat on the question of government support for Christian zending.
”Kende Indië alleen van het papier”
In the retrospective of Vermeulen, De Waal Malefijt “kende Indië alleen van het papier” — knew the Indies only from paper. Yet the same verdict notes that one should not therefore suppose his ministry was particularly bad: “Zijne Excellentie kon terugvallen op de adviezen uit Indië” — His Excellency could fall back on the advices from the Indies. The complaint of the chambermembers, however, was that the minister too often “zich er achter verschool” — hid behind them — and that the ambtelijke adviezen (official advices) from the governor-general, the residents, the directors, the Raad van Indië, the Hooggerechtshof, the generals, the staatscommissies concealed more than they revealed.
The 1911 begrotingsdebat on the zending
In the 1911 begrotingsdebat Kuyper (a.r.) — cornering De Waal Malefijt on the basis of Snouck Hurgronje’s recently published Nederland en de Islam ([[1911)|Nederland en de Islam]] — argued for bizonder onderwijs (confessional schools) as the rule in the Indies, with gouvernementsonderwijs as a supplement only. De Waal Malefijt replied that he adhered to the position of his predecessors: no direct support for the zending (missions), but strong support where the missions operated on social terrain. Kuyper’s rule for confessional schools was, in his view, possible only in a few regions of the Buitenbezettingen where the missions had gained a firm foothold; on Java — where the Muslim majority lacked the organisation to act on its own initiative — the rule was inapplicable.
The Kuyper–Heemskerk incident
Kuyper’s feeling that De Waal Malefijt had failed to “warm genoeg voor de a.r. beginselen uitkomen” — to come out warmly enough for the anti-revolutionary principles — and his suspicion of “de explosie van gejubel bij de linkse heren” — the explosion of jubilation among the gentlemen of the left — led to an incident in which De Waal Malefijt “zich op zijn beurt door Kuyper gekrenkt [voelde]” — felt himself in turn injured by Kuyper — and the first minister Heemskerk had to come to his defence. The incident, “die in die tijd veel opzien baarde” — which in its day caused much stir — was, in Vermeulen’s judgement, perhaps most of all a symptom of the “geprikkelde stemming” between Kuyper and the Heemskerk-De Waal Malefijt government.
On the adat-law revision
During the debate on the revision of the adat-law provisions for the indigenous population, De Waal Malefijt (a.r.) was one of only three supporters — alongside Van Deventer (v.d.) — of minister Fock’s position. The amendment of Van Idsinga — broadly reflecting what Lohman wanted — was eventually accepted.
See Also
- Heemskerk (first minister)
- Abraham Kuyper
- C. Snouck Hurgronje
- Nederland en de Islam (Snouck Hurgronje, 1911)
- 1911 Indische begrotingsdebat
- Ethische Politiek
- Zending (in Nederlandsch-Indië)
- Buitenbezittingen
- Raad van Indië
- D. Fock
- C. Th. van Deventer
- Lohman (De Savornin Lohman)
- Van Idsinga
- 1911
- 1913
Source
Schets eener parlementaire geschiedenis van Nederland van 1849 tot 1901, by Mr W. J. van Welderen baron Rengers, 4th rev. ed., Vol. IV: Oost-Indië 1891-1918 by Dr W. H. Vermeulen (‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1955), pp. 265-266, 319-321, 326-327.