J.

Cobban Uncontrolled urban settlement: The kampong question in Semarang (1905 - 1940) In: Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 130 (1974), no: 4, Leiden, 403-427

This PDF-file was downloaded from http://www.kitlv-journals.nl

JAMES L. COBBAN

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT: THE KAMPONG QUESTION IN SEMARANG (1905-1940)
Introduction One of the characteristics of colonial cities on Java which came to the fore during the last thirty-five years of Dutch rule was the presence within the boundaries of the urban municipalities {Stadsgemeenten) of indigenous villages which existed as independent entities, self-regulating in their internal [huishoudelijk) affairs, and whose autonomy was guaranteed by the Dutch East Indian Constitution (Regeeringsreglement) of 1854.1 The inclusion of extensive and often populous villages (both kampongs and desas) within the boundaries of the cities but outside the jurisdiction of the city councils led to differences in what might be termed the areal distribution of prosperity, that is, the juxtaposition within the cities of contiguous areas varying in physical attractiveness, population densities, hygienic conditions and standards of living, as well as to variations in the effectiveness of governing authority.2 Such differentiation led to tension between the city governments and the population of the indigenous villages as both sought to change conditions in the city kampongs and to introducé to them the physical standards of the urban environment which the city councils had succeeded in maintaining in the European parts of the cities.
1

2

The Regeeringsreglement was the result of a series of Government decrees beginning in 1806 concerned with the governing of the Dutch East Indies. It remained in effect, with modifications, until its replacement in 1925 by the Indische Staatsregeling (Wet op de Staatsinrichting van NederlandschIndië) also periodically modified. The law as it had evolved by 1938 is reprinted as bijlage 2 in J. J. Schrieke, Inleiding in het Staatsrecht van Nederlandsch-Indië, Haarlem, 1940, pp. 193-236. The desa is a village surrounded by cultivated fields and waste lands and is distinguished from the kampong, a settlement with no fields or lands and found usually within the boundaries of a town or city. This distinction was noted by L. W. C. van den Berg in "Het Inlandsche Gemeentewezen op Java en Madura", Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van NederlandschIndië, deel 52, 1901, p. 20, and is still in general usage.

404

JAMES L. COBBAN

The present article deals primarily with the indigenous settlements in their relationship with the city of Semarang during the last twenty-five years of colonial rule. It provides some insight into the nature of the colonial city on Java during the twentieth century and gives historical depth to the phenomena of squatter settlements which have been characteristic of many cities in Southeast Asia during the past twenty years. There is no atterhpt to imply that squatter settlements are identical, particularly from the point of view of legal land titles and magnitude of problems, with the urban kampongs and desas of the last decades of the colonial era, but there is a suggestion that the latter are predecessors of the former and that the characteristics of squatter settlements are not new. The similarities between the two sorts of communities are striking and reiterate the view that the phenomena of uncontrolled urban settlement perhaps have only been rediscovered in recent years because of the numbers of people involved and the greater awareness of the impact such people have on cities. Much of the information on Semarang was recorded in the bi-monthly Locale Belangen published by the society, with headquarters in Semarang, which represented the body of civic officials created after the incorporation of the urban municipalities in 1905 and 1906 and founded as a forum for information and communication among civic officials in Indonesia. The problems presented by the existence of kampongs within the cities and the solutions which were proposed came to be known as the Kampong Question (Kampongvraagstuk). The concept was tripartite in nature. It included abolition (opheffing) of the kampongs as internally autonomous entities, the extension of the jurisdiction of the city councils into the kampongs, and improvement (verbetering) of such components of the urban infrastructure as roads, sewers, sanitation, garbage removal and water supply. The question was considered to be most urgent in the larger cities of Java, such as Semarang, Surabaja, and Bandung, but the smaller centers of Sukabumi, Malang, Bogor (Buitenzorg), Tegal, Pekalongan and Madiun on Java also expressed their desire to abolish the desa autonomy in their midst, as did Makassar on Sulawesi and Pematang Siantar on the East Coast of Sumatera.3 The discussions took on a flurry of activity during the few years around 1920,
3

See the report dated 20 September 1922 on governmental reform in the large cities on Java (De Hervorming van het Bestuur in de Groote Hoofdplaatsen op Java) by the Assistant Resident of Semarang J. van Gigch, reprinted in part in Gellius Flieringa, De Zorg voor de Volkshuisvesting in de Stadsgemeenten in Nederlandsch Oost-Indië in het bijzonder in Semarang, Rotterdam and Amsterdam, 1930, p. 295.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

405

reflecting the problems which had existed with the formation of the urban municipalities and the creation of civic authority at the beginning of the century. The issue was less severe around Djakarta mostly because of the large area covered by private estates (particuliere landerijen), land which had been alienated to private ownership during the time of the Dutch East India Company and later, early- in the eighteenth century, during the rule of Stamford Raffles.4 Perspective on the kampong question can be gained by recognizing the process of city growth which seemed to be characteristic of the Western oriented city on Java. Most urban centers began as indigenous settlements, conglomerations of kampongs, intersected by straight, often wide, streets which ran in an East-West or North-South direction.5 The urban core expanded gradually by means of boundary changes and when these were made to accommodate European interests, it resulted in the automatic inclusion of indigenous villages within the city jurisdiction. The apparant anomaly of city expansion encompassing villages which retained their autonomy is explained by the fact that European urban development took place mostly along the main roads and city expansion was dictated by the need to extend along the road system. The result was the surrounding of desas which, in turn, gradually sold part of their lands into private ownership as the city grew around them. Eventually all that remained of many desas, especially those near the center and hence in the oldest sections of the city, was the built-up parts, that is, only land with buildings on it. With alienation of all but built-up parcels, the effectiveness of desa autonomy and organization lapsed and the settlements became converted into kampongs occupying enclaves often hidden from view. The extent to which city expansion encompassed villages in some cities can be gauged by the comment of Th. W. van Kempen concerning Surabaja in 1927. "There is hardly a piece of land in the whole city of Surabaja," he wrote, "which does not belong to one or other desa or kampong. The large city of Surabaja is a collection of kampongs." 6
4

5

6

Van Gigch stated that there were in Batavia no indigenous communities (Inlandsche gemeenten) in the sense of article 71 of the Regeeringsreglement. See Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 292 and 295. "Toelichting op de 'Stadsvormingordonnantie Stadsgemeenten Java', Batavia, 1938", excerpts translated and printed in The Indonesian Town, The Hague and Bandung, 1958, pp. 1-77. Reference from p. 35. Th. W. van Kempen, "Over het Kampongvraagstuk in de Groote Indische Stadsgemeenten," Koloniaal Tijdschrift, 16de jaargang, 1927, pp. 441-453. Quote from p. 447.

406

JAMES L. COBBAN

Even the Residency house and grounds were located on the domain of a kampong. The autonomy of the desas did not hinder the founding of European residential areas with their wide roads and glittering houses. In fact, desa authority disappeared altogether in certain parts as the city took over local functions. Much the same can be said of the expansion and growth of Semarang, which about this time included 137 villages within its boundaries.7 The Kampong Question, thus, was concerned with those parts of cities enclosed by the wide streets of European residential areas and work places, indigenous enclaves which made up a substantial area of the cities. It is pertinent here to remember the diversity of land tenure and usufruct rights which could be found on Java af ter 1905. Besides the aforementioned indigenous enclaves (the so-called Government kampongs), and the private estates, a. number of other categories of land existed. These included land owned by the Government on which no usufruct rights were granted (Vrij Landsdomein) but which was sometimes given to the urban municipalities for use in the public interest, for example parks; land owned by the Moslem religious community (Wakaf-grond), usually of very small extent; Government land on which the right to erect buildings was granted (opstal), usually on long-term lease; land owned by the cities which had been given to them by the Government from land expropriated or purchased from private estates; parcels of land owned by private individuals; agrarian land; and another category of Government land over which Indonesians could exercise rights of usage on individual parcels. Besides these there were also city kampongs built by the cities on land which they had in some way acquired.8 Improvement of the kampong infrastructure can be regarded from a number of points of view. At first, it was chiefly a European concern, but over the years it received acceptance among the indigenous population. The kampong dwellers themselves initially regarded extension of civic authority into the kampongs as illegal encroachment into village affairs. After some years, they were prepared to ignore the overlapping of jurisdictions and became anxious to accept the improvements in sanitation, road maintenance, water supply and police protection which
T 8

See map of Semarang showing location of desas and list of desa names in Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 33-35. Ibid., pp. 30-32. The "Toelichting" in The Indonesian Town, p. 55, mentions also "unknown lands" whose owners were not known, as well as residence under adat law on land belonging to another.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

407

improvement promised. In the European community, a number of attitudes were discernable. One was that of moral indignation over the squalid living conditions of the indigenous population living within the cities. Another was expressed in a statement made by the Mayor of Surabaja that the crux of the kampong question was that of making their city a healthy place in which to live.9 A third was that of noninterference, that the indigenous folk had their own independent life to live and their own particular destiny. The modern student of colonialism regards the kampong question as one more manifestation of the conflict inherent in colonial society, the results of, in the words of Albert Demangeon, "Ie contact des deux types de peuples appelés a s'associer dans une colonie." 10 The urbanist can find in miniature the very problems and issues presently faced by Southeast Asian and other Third World cities regarding rural migration, adjustment to urban life and improvements in overcrowded conditions in squatter settlements, all of which were present in their essence in the kampongs of the colonial cities on Java over half a century ago.11 The unhappy fact of kampong improvement throughout the colonial period was the inability of the kampongs to generate from within themselves the capital necessary to finance the physical standards of an urban habitat foreign to them and for which traditional society had no precedent.12 The kampong improvers were attempting to extend to
9

Reprinted in an extensive consideration of kampong improvement in Surabaja
published in Locale Belangen, 7de jaargang, 1 and 16 April 1920, pp. 674-684. Quote from p. 677, "Hoe maken wij de stad onzer inwoning tot een gezonde woonplaats ?" Albert Demangeon, L'Empire Britannique, Paris, 1923, p. v. In his discussion of the focus of colonial geography, Demangeon distinguished between the two peoples, the one being "avance, pourvu de capitaux et de moyens matériels, en quête de richesses nouvelles, mobile dans 1'espace, ouvert a la notion de 1'entreprise, de Paventure, de 1'inconnu et de 1'exotique" and the other "isolé, replié sur lui-même, fidele a d'antiques modes de vie, aux horizons bornés, mal équipé en armes et en outils." General insights into squatter settlements can be found in two works by Charles Abrams, Squatter Settlements, Washington, 1966 and Man's Struggle for Shelter, Cambridge, 1964 as well as in Aprodicio A. Laquian, Slums are for People (The Barrio Magsaysay Pilot Project in Philippine Urban Community Development), Honolulu, 1971 and Morris Juppenlatz, Cities in Transformation (The Urban Squatter Problem of the Developing World), University of Queensland Press, 1970. Further references are contained in Aprodicio A. Laquian and Penny Dutton, A Selected Bibliography on RuralUrban Migrants' Slums and Squatters in Developing Countries, Council of Planning Librarians, Exchange Bibliography, No. 182, 1971. Modern squatter settlements sometimes do show an ability for self-improvement and community action as demonstrated in the Barrio Magsaysay Pilot

10

11

12

408

JAMES L. COBBAN

the kampongs the same level of urban infrastructure which evolved in Western Europe, along with its advances in wealth and technology, and which was subsequently introduced into the European sector of one of its socially and economically stratified outposts in Southeast Asia. The financial instability of the kampongs was paralleled by a shortage of revenue on the part of the various city councils as well as a drive for economy in its own affairs by the central Government at Djakarta (Batavia), so that both civic and central administrations experienced difficulty, with few exceptions, in allotting funds for the purposes of kampong improvement until the end of the 1920's and even these had to be severely curtailed within a year or two because of the effects of the world depression. Even the recommendation of the Kampong Improvement Commission (Kamponguerbeteringscommissie) of 1938 that the costs of improvements be rolled back to those people who would benefit, could not have succeeded, even if there had been time to attempt its implementation.13 That money was the main impediment to the successful solution of the problems was widely recognized very early in the discussions on kampong improvement. Mr. S. Cohen, while Resident of Surabaja in 1921, wrote in a report to the Governor-General that the kampong question up to that time had been too academie and that the so-called kampong question had one easy solution. "A single word," he wrote, "conveys the whole solution and that word is MONEY." 14 All that was necessary, he declared, was money, money and still more
Project in the Philippines (Laquian, op. cit.) and described by John F. C. Turner concerning Peru ("Uncontrolled Urban Settlement: Problems and Policies", Pittsburg, 1966, reprinted in Gerald Breese, The City in Newly Developing Countries, Englewood Cliffs, 1969, pp. 507-534). In Surabaja, shortly after the Pacific War, some 200 kampongs formed a self-help organization (Rukun Kampong Kota Surabaja) for the improvement of village infrastructure and the combatting of illiteracy. See The Siauw Giap, "Urbanisatieproblemen in Indonesië", Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, deel 115, 3e aflevering, 1959, pp. 249-276. Reference on p. 270. Eerste Verslag van de Kampongverbeteringscommissie, ingesteld bij het Gouvemementsbesluit van 25 Mei 1939, No. 30. This report is difficult to obtain but comments on it are made in F. H. van de Wetering, "Kampongverbetering", Koloniale Studiën, 23e jaargang, No. 4, August 1939, pp. 307325. Reference on p. 318. Photographs of kampong conditions in the early years can be found in H. F. Tillema, Van Wonen en Bewonen, van Bouwen, Huis en Erf, Tjandi-Semarang, 1913 and for a later period in 25 Jaren Decentralisatie in Nederlandsch-Indië 1905-1930, published by the Vereeniging voor Locale Belangen, Semarang. Flieringa, op. cit., p. 38. "Een enkel woord reeds brengt de geheele oplossing, en dat woord is 'GELD'." See also Van Kempen, op. cit., p. 446. •

13

14

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

409

money. The Director of the Civil Service (Directeur van Binnenlandsch Bestuur), L. J. Schippers, wrote in a memo dated 8 September 1921 that with the kampong question they were dealing with many millions of guilders in initial costs and millions more in yearly expenses. He feit that these funds could not be granted given the then present state of the Dutch East Indian finances. Again, in 1924, in a note dated 27 March, the Governor-General stated that it was desirable to come to a conclusion of the kampong question after all that had been said over the course of the preceding few years. However, the greatest difficulty was the pitiful condition of the country's finances and he reiterated that the solution of the problein must not cost the Government any money.15 Crowded conditions sufficient to cause breakdown of village infrastructure, authority and organization probably had not occurred on Java before the modernizing influence of the Dutch in the nineteenth century made itself feit. Traditionally, villages avoided overcrowding by a process of hiving in which daughter villages were established some distance from the parent settlement. The harbour cities of the preEuropean and early European centuries may have been densely populated relative to rural settlements. One might question, however, whether there existed a floating population of migrants from the Javanese countryside similar to the inhabitants of the urban kampongs in the twentieth century. Housing improvement remained outside the sphere of kampong improvement largely because it was related to the control of contagious diseases, notably bubonic plague. Housing came under the authority of the city councils by means of the power transferred to them by the Government in the Acts of Incorporation and overlapped to some extent the goals claimed for kampong improvement. Since plans for kampong improvement were not yet fixed, up-grading of houses was not considered feasible, partially because of cost and partially because there was no guarantee that improved houses would not be moved or destroyed to make way for improvements in roads or drains as different authorities exercised their jurisdiction in an uncoordinated ad hoc manner. Since the design of the indigenous houses in the kampongs unwittingly provided nesting places for rats, it was proposed by the civic authorities in Semarang and Djakarta to redesign the houses so as to remove nesting places and rebuild them at the expense of the owners. Djakarta even sponsored a public competition to this end and
15

Flieringa, op. cit., p. 41.

410

JAMES L. COBBAN

Semarang considered the same. Kampong dwellers were unable to pay the costs of improvements in housing, so that in Semarang the city council contented itself with regular inspection, usually weekly, to see that houses were kept clean and that nests did not remain. Improvement of kampongs and desas on the private estates also was not considered as part of the kampong question. The desas lying within the estates were not recognized by the Inlandsche Gemeente-ordonnantie of 1906 {Staatsblad No. 83) and before kampong improvement could be undertaken on them, the estates would have to be purchased by the Government, a course of action begun in 1906. At the time the kampong question was being discussed, the relations between the Government and the estate owners in Western Java and between these owners and the inhabitants of their estates were regulated by legislation in 1902, with subsequent modifications. This legislation made the maintenance of roads and bridges the responsibility of the estate owners.18 The relationship between estate owners and their inhabitants in Central and Eastern Java, and hence Semarang, was regulated by Government ordinances of 1880, 1886, and 1913. Private estates existed within the boundaries of the cities and sometimes were extensive. In Semarang, just under one third of the territory included within the city boundary was made up of such estates, covering some 3250 hectares of the total 10,000 hectares of the city area. These estates, owned mostly by Chinese, were twenty-two in number and produced mostly rice and vegetables.17 The authority to abolish the kampong organization within the cities rested with the Governor-General. It was necessary to alter or remove article 71 of the Regeeringsreglement, the clause which guaranteed the autonomy in their internal affairs of the desas and kampongs of Java outside the private estates. A change in the Constitution was made in 1918 and a decree qualifying article 71 appeared as number 482 in the Indisch Staatsblad of 23 February. It allowed the abolition of those kampongs lying wholly or partially within the boundaries of a city in which a city council had been established.18 Actually, the abolition
16

17 18

"Nieuw Reglement omtrent de Particuliere Landerijen, gelegen ten Westen der rivier Tji Manoek", vastgesteld bij ordonnantie van 3 Augustus 1922, referred to in Flieringa, op. cit., p. 17. See maps facing p. 190, tables pp. 192-193, descriptive text pp. 194-195 in Flieringa, op. cit., and pp. 16-20. "die geheel of gedeeltelijk zijn binnen de grenzen van eene stad, waarvoor een raad . . . is ingesteld." Reprinted in Flieringa, op. cit., p. 287. In the Indische Staatsregeling of 1925, article 71 became article 128, paragraph 6, containing the wording allowing abolition. By 1938, this paragraph had seldom

UNCÓNTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

411

aspect of kampong improvement became part of the greater concern for administrative reform in the large cities. Though abolition could be achieved from a legal standpoint by a simple act of law, improvement of living conditions and village infrastructure would be more difficult. The problems were never completely solved and the issue smoldered for some twenty-five years until the outbreak of the Pacific War, though some progress could be claimed for the last few years of the colonial era. In the Act of Incorporation (Instellingordonnantie) of the respective cities, the position of the kampongs within the city boundaries had not been specifically mentioned and their autonomy had been accepted on the basis of the general guarantees contained in the Constitution. The question whether authority over the desa should be transferred to the local councils (locale raden), of which the city councils (gemeenteraden) were one, had been debated in the Netherlands Parliament between 1901 and 1903 during the discussions of the decentralization legislation which led up to the creation of the urban municipalities. The decision at that time was to keep authority over the desas and kampongs in the hands of the Government in Djakarta.19 However, the vagueness of the wording in the Acts of Incorporation prompted the Mayors of Semarang and Surabaja some years later to challenge the autonomous rights of the city kampongs and their exclusion from the

jurisdiction of the city councils in an attempt to proceed with changes
in the kampong infrastructure independent of Government approval. The First Initiatives The Government's early concern for kampong improvement focused on five years around 1920, reaching its peak in September of 1922 with the publication of a report by the Assistant Resident of Semarang, J. van Gigch. He had been examining administrative reform in the large cities of Java and included the kampong question in his enquiry because of the implications which abolition had for the governance of the desa populations. The earliest mention of kampong improvement in the cities came at the time of the creation of the urban municipalities, when the
been invoked: in Malang during 1927, 1930 and 1938 (ƒ.5. numbers 181, 372 and 351 in the respective years), and in Surabaja during 1930 (I.S. number 373). Lucien Adam, De Autonomie van het Indonesische Dorp, Amersfoort, 1924, p. 112, quoted in Flieringa, op. cit., p. 36.

19

412

JAMES L. COBBAN

condition of the kampong roads of Djakarta had been a matter of concern to the Minister of Colonies. He asked the Governor-General if it would be possible for the Government to grant a subsidy to the city to allow improvement of the roads in the kampongs within city boundaries. However, this early attention to the question was pushed into the background by the larger question of increasing the Government financial subsidies to the urban municipalities. But the existence of the independent enclaves within the cities was not forgotten and, in 1914, the Governor-General himself questioned whether there might be a way in which the autonomy of the desas lying within city boundaries could be ended, saying that he would offer no objections to changing article 71 of the Constitution. About this same time, other members of the colonial government hierarchy began to examine kampong abolition. The Advisor for Decentralization began an enquiry into abolition in consultation with the Assistant Residents of Semarang and Surabaja, then chairmen of their respective city councils, the office of Mayor not yet having been instituted. A Commission consisting of the Controleur and two members of the Native Civil Service was set up to consider abolition of the desas in Semarang and it came to the conclusion that abolition was urgent and practical and recommended that it be undertaken rapidly. The Director of the Civil Service also became interested, but he thought that a change in the Regeeringsreglement was not necessary, that the cities could extend their jurisdiction into the kampongs without abolition taking place. Even the Indies Council {Raad van Indië) agreed that in the long run an end must come to the autonomy of the desas in the cities and was not against changing article 71 to allow this. In 1915, the Minister of Colonies became convinced of the desirability of abolition, at least in those cities in which procedures had been introduced for the election of non-Europeans to the city councils, and thought that an end to desa autonomy should be made as soon as possible. The matter went as far as the Netherlands Parliament (Staten-Generaal) when, in 1915, the Vereeniging voor Locale Belangen addressed a petition to the First Chamber and the matter was subject to intermittent discussion during the following years.20 In 1917, the Government formally indicated its interest regarding kampong improvement in a letter dated 30 May, which was sent to the city councils of Semarang and Surabaja. 21 The letter notified that
20 2X

Recounted in the report of J. van Gigch in Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 287-291. Locale Belangen, 6de jaargang, 1 March 1919, p. 563.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

413

revision of article 71 of the Dutch East Indian Constitution was under consideration and advised that, if changes were effected, the municipalities would be responsible for extending their jurisdiction over those matters granted them by their Act of Incorporation to the kampong areas within the city boundaries. The letter expressed the Government's expectation that improvements would be incorporated as part of the general upkeep of Semarang and Surabaja and not be considered as a separate undertaking, and that fundamental improvements would be made automatically and rather quickly, soon after the inclusion of the former villages within the jurisdiction of the city councils. The central issue of finance was reflected in the closing lines of the letter. Whereas the Government would be agreeable to setting aside some money in its budget of 1918 to help with initial costs, it did not intend to bear the complete expense of improvement programs, such programs being the responsibility of the civic authorities. While such a Government position would be expected in an action which was enlarging the jurisdiction of the city councils, it reflected also the low revenues which plagued the colonial government and was an indication of the deterrent role which finances would play in improvement. Some two years later, in 1920, after the necessary changes in the Constitution had been made, the Government wrote to the Residents

of the Preanger, Semarang and Surabaja suggesting that they set up
commissions to advise the respective city councils of all matters which might pertain should the changes now allowed by the Constitution be invoked within the capitals of each Residency.22 By then abolition had been accepted in principle and it would be the duty of the commissions to consider the ways in which abolition might be undertaken, the order in which it should come about, and to determine if new civic machinery might be necessary to administer the settlements after they had come under the authority of the city council. Circumstances which might hinder the abolition of a particular community were to be examined, as well as financial aspects. An estimate was to be made of the money needed to maintain the infrastructure of each settlement in its existing condition for the first year and of the sums which would be necessary to make urgent improvements in subsequent years. Members of the committees were drawn primarily from among Government officials.

22

Ibid., 8ste jaargang, 16 December 1920, pp. 378-395. Also reprinted in Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 261-272.

414

JAMES L. COBBAN

The only Indonesian member would be the district head of the Native Civil Service in whose jurisdiction the kampong lay. Curiously, there was no suggestion that any member of the village administrations be included as members of the commissions. Surabaja did not accept the Government's suggestion, but Semarang responded enthusiastically. It is because Semarang was the only large city to file a report that the discussion of the question turns primarily to that city. Problems of Abolition: The Example of Semarang The report of the Semarang Commission, dated 18 October 1920, appeared a year and a half later and strongly favoured abolition of those kampongs lying well within the boundaries of the city because in those communities breakdown of traditional village unity {desaverband) was especially marked.23 This recommendation did not apply to the outlying desas, only recently included within the city because of the boundary changes of 1919 and 1920. These villages still possessed most of their rural character. In them the feeling of village unity was strong, traditional services were still performed, the villages still owned large tracts of land, and internal affairs continued to be regulated by communal discussion. The report posed the question whether Semarang should extend its municipal services to these desas anyway, to prevent their deterioration to the squalid conditions so often characteristic of the city kampongs. The commission did not consult with the desa inhabitants concerning abolition even though it recognized the fairness of doing so, as did the Mayor and the Resident of Semarang. It preferred to wait until specifically requested to do so by the Government.24 Not surprisingly, the most formidable problem which the report foresaw was that of finance. The desa as a self-contained entity traditionally had supplied labour for public works at no cost to the village government. In many of the city kampongs, these services for the most part had been commuted into a money tax so that work was done by paid labour with an accompanying lowering of work standards. The city council would not be able to command traditional services where they still existed after abolition so that maintenance and landscaping of roads, care of bridges and dikes, cleaning of gutters, spraying of streets, removal of refuse, and street lighting would have to be paid for in cash.
23

24

Ibid., 8ste jaargang, 16 December 1920, pp. 378-395. Also reprinted in Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 261-272. Ibid., p. 307.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT •

415

Payment meant that the Government or the city would have to institute a tax to raise funds for the purpose. Raising money by taxes was seldom successful in pre-war Java because of the general level of poverty which existed among the indigenous population. The committee found that improvement of kampong roads would constitute a major expense. Roads were generally in bad repair and more than mere upkeep would be necessary before they could be considered satisfactory. The commissioners probably feit that the financial aspects of their report were only preliminary for they indicated that a lengthy study would be necessary to estimate the total cost of kampong improvements. Not only would such a job be time-consuming, it would also require more people for its accomplishment than the city had at its disposal. The report also pointed out that the Semarang city council would be unable to assume all of the authority formerly vested in the village administration. The collection of Government revenue, such as land rent, head tax, business tax, and the tax on the slaughtering of animals would remain outside the authority of the council. Traditional police duties exercised by the headman (desahoofd) would become the responsibility of the Resident, under whose authority all police functions, even those of the cities, were vested. In Semarang, the transference of the police authority would not pose a practical problem. The breakdown of the village organization in the city kampongs had been so severe that the police function had already vanished and much of the maintenance of peace and order was being done by the police of Semarang. In 1918, the night watch had been abolished within the old boundaries of the city. Traditional security precautions were still performed in the newly incorporated desas on the outskirts of Semarang but even these villages had requested that they be relieved of their police duties. Extension of police services to the outlying desas would pose a problem to Semarang because it would entail expenditure for the recruitment of more men. The committee also considered a number of minor village functions. The religious life of the inhabitants, for example, would fall outside the authority of the city council. The report recommended that village mosques, where such existed, be put under the authority of the great mosque in Semarang and village priests under the authority of religious officials in the city. Land associated with such mosques could be classified as religious provided it accrued to the city against compensation should it be needed in the public interest. What few village schools there were would remain outside the control of the city council. However, village markets and cemeteries could be transferred to muni-

416

JAMES L. COBBAN

cipal control. Whatever money the desa might possess could be given over and used for improvements. Disposal of village land would be more complicated. Abolition of the desa would obviate the need for village officials and therefore render unnecessary the village lands (ambtsvelden) used to remunerate them. One suggestion for the disposal of such land where it still existed was to allow former village officials with long service a life tenancy of their erstwhile fields. Alternatively, the commissioners thought it more advisable for the city to assume the land directly and pay the former officials an annuity until their death. They suggested that parts of the ambtsvelden which the city would not want, could be parcelled out and sold, first to members of the village and then to inhabitants of Semarang. Disposal of village communal land presented different problems. Usually such land was burdened with shareholders' rights. The report recommended that such land be converted into private property and distributed by the village members themselves before abolition took place. There were psychological implications involved in dismantling village organization and bringing village populations under the jurisdiction of the larger civic administration. These were recognized by the Mayor of Semarang, D. de Jongh, and recorded in a proposal to the city council dated 22 November 1920, some few weeks after the appearance of the Commission's Report. 25 He noted that the residents of the kampongs were mostly Indonesians, Chinese and other Asians whose interests were much more different than those of the city council which, though it had Indonesian representation, was predominantly European in outlook. Normally, the city council came into little daily contact with the indigenous population. lts attention was concentrated on the European affairs of the city. With abolition, the civic authorities would be brought into much closer contact with the kampong folk and it would be desirable that the authorities gain the same psychological acceptance by the inhabitants which formerly they had accorded the village administration as their trusted form of government. Previously, the occasional forays of the city council into the kampong had been regarded as interference in village affairs. The relationship between the city authorities and the villages was distant and impersonal. The goals of the city council were often futuristic and intangible as far as the villagers were concerned. The Mayor thought that by expanding

25

Ibid., 8ste jaargang, 16 December 1920, pp. 363-378. Reprinted in Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 277-285.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

417

its activities and providing for the more tangible needs of the kampong dwellers, the city council might be able to improve its relationship with the mass of people and fill the void in their governance which would occur with the abolition of the kampongs. This would be a new and perhaps not an easy task for the Semarang city council, which had had little experience in dealing with the native population directly and en masse. The size and shape of Semarang suggested that the distance between the outlying desas and the city hall would add to the sense of estrangement. By 1920, Semarang covered an area of 100 square kilometers (about 36 square miles). The longest diagonal distance was 15 kilometers (about 10 miles) and the distance from the outermost desas to the city hall was between six and ten kilometers (from 4 to 6 miles). If the city hall were to replace the village administration, a person on foot or on a bicycle would have a long way to go to air a simple complaint. Because of this, the psychological distance between the city administration and the kampong dwellers would probably become greater rather than improve and the life of the inhabitants was likely to be made more difficult. Concentration of city functions in one building would have its disadvantages for the city as well. Government departments easily could become encumbered with petty grievances and petitions which would be time-consuming to solve. Individual matters, in themselves insignificant, considered together could become oppressive. The Mayor also foresaw problems with the desas lying immediately beyond the city boundaries. He was concerned with the possibility that undesirable conditions, which in the city would be subject to stringent regulations, could thrive uncontrolled immediately across the city boundary. He thought there should be some unifying principle of government which would prevent the juxtaposition of such disparate activity and he favored a broad ring of suburbs surrounding the city which could be prepared gradually for incorporation within city boundaries so that if abolition of any of these villages were to be undertaken in the future, the municipal authority and services would be able immediately to fill the void created by the dissolution of the desabestuur and allow smooth functioning of the settlement. He proposed that civic authority be extended beyond the boundaries of the city and that land speculators be controlled, since expropriation against compensation was the means by which Semarang expanded and obtained land for its housing projects. Two additional problems, noted by the Mayor, were liable to arise with kampong abolition. One was the matter of communication as it

418

JAMES L. COBBAN

concerned the dissemination of government ordinances and decrees. Literacy of the masses could not be assumed as it could among the European members of the city. The kampong dwellers were not liable to be familiar with any law other than that of custom (adat). They probably would not be able to read decrees which the Government or the city council would enact from time to time. Hence a way would have to be found to enable governance by verbal communication and in 1918 such a means did not exist in Semarang. Another problem liable to be encountered would be that of political apathy. Economie growth had been encouraged in the city, at the expense of its social and political life, in accordance with the goals of the European elite. Most of the kampong dwellers displayed little interest in politics. They did not see the city council as being representative of diem. Hence the majority were apathetic even about election to the city council of its Indonesian members. The Act of Incorporation of the Urban Municipality of Semarang had allowed five Indonesians to sit on the city council, compared to fifteen Europeans and three representatives of other Asians.26 Apathy was not a matter of much importance so long as the city council had little to do with the kampongs. However, after abolition, the city council would have jurisdiction over kampong affairs and apathy would mean the giving up of potential influence on the city council in matters which might concern them, even though the Europeans would always have a majority. A sense of urgency hung over the kampong question in Semarang by the beginning of the 1920's. The feeling was directed more toward the city kampongs, where breakdown of the village life was great because of the proximity to the European parts of the city and the reorientation of occupations which such nearness allowed.27 The sense of urgency was less strong in the outlying desas because of the strength
28 Indisch Staatsblad, 1906, No. 120. 27 "j"he breakdown of authority in the city kampongs occurred also in Surabaja and doubtless in other urban municipalities as well. The retiring Resident Hillen of Surabaja in his Memorie van Overgave dated 4 July 1924 for the period of June 1922 to July 1924 reported: "Dat de desa ter hoofdplaats Soerabaja gedesorganiseerd is, en de desa hoofden daar geen invloed meer hebben, behoeft geen betoog." The report of Van Gigch mentions the heterogeneous composition of the population of the desas in Semarang in 1920, which for the large part came from elsewhere. Flieringa, op. cit., p. 274. H. J. Heeren, in a study of urbanization in Djakarta in 1956, showed immigration continuing after the war in certain kampongs of Djakarta. H. J. Heeren (ed.) "The Urbanization of Djakarta", Ekonomi Dan Keuangarv Indonesia, Tahun Ke VIII, No. 11, Nopember 1955, pp. 696-736, see particularly table 14, p. 730.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

419

of their village organization. In these latter settlements, the future demands on the municipal services were not liable to be stringent bécause the outlying villages were spacious and less crowded than the city kampongs. Street lighting could be less strong, street cleaning simpler, and roads would need fewer repairs. However, both types of settlements had a large floating population of recent migrants from the countryside and these people had no relation whatever to the villages in which they settled. The control of the village headman over newcomers was weak and probably lessened as their numbers increased with each additional influx. Solutions Proposed for Semarang To solve the problems of psychological estrangement and communication which he foresaw, the Mayor proposed the creation of additional branches of the city administration which might enable regular communications with the people. He envisaged a part of the civil administration which could be substituted in the minds of the people for the familiar organs of village government and be regarded as their own. He hoped that the people would turn with confidence to these new organs, to express their wants and for a verbal presentation of the various regulations of the city council and the Government. He suggested the kampong areas be set up as wards {wijken), each having its own administration and headed by a wardmaster (wijkmeester), who would have his own personnel, committee of advisors and an office in the ward itself. Such a reorganizatión would continue, in effect, the old form of village government under a new name. The aim was to bring about a reorganizatión in which the change in authority would be imperceptible to the inhabitants. The whole ward structure could be coordinated by a new branch of the city government to be created to oversee affairs in the former kampongs. The wardmaster, by living in the ward and by means of monthly meetings with his committee and other village authorities, could remain in close contact with the people. The police and tax functions of government would not be part of his duties. Hence he would be spared some of the unpleasant functions of government and be in a good position to gain the confidence and trust of the people. His qualifications would be those of a low-ranking official of the Native Civil Service. His office would be in the former kampong so that people could talk to him with no inconvenience to themselves. At the ward office routine concerns of the people could be handled. These would include enquiries of all sorts,

420

JAMES L. COBBAN

the writing of complaints, applications for building permits and store licences which could then be forwarded to the city hall for approval. The ward office could be the point of dissemination for information on and propaganda for matters of general interest, such as public health. The Mayor proposed that the ward committee have only an advisory function. Though at first its members would be appointed by the city council, if the system was shown to work, members could be elected by the ward inhabitants from among themselves. The committee would bear the same relation to the wardmaster as the village government did to the Assistant-Wedono. The duties of the committee members would keep the wardmaster informed of the temper of the people. They would be responsible for knowing the problems and wishes of the people and would explain to them Government and civic ordinances. All discussions would be carried out in the indigenous language. The new ward government, in the opinion of the Mayor, should be established before abolition took place, so that members of the ward administration could consult with desa officials and perhaps with the people themselves. In the outlying desas the Mayor suggested that the old village government be retained and be made a civic organization so that the wardmaster could gain support from them. In the city kampongs, he proposed that the committee members be chosen when possible from the old functionaries to ensure a measure of continuity in governance and to form a bridge to extend across the psychological gaps which abolition was expected to create. In keeping with the sanguine outlook on financial matters which pervaded all levels of the Indies administration, the Mayor was hopeful that some money could be found to give to the ward administration so that in small matters it could have a degree of independence. The new branch of the city government, the Gemeentelijke Bestuursdienst, would assume responsibility for some of the duties of the former village authorities, particularly in the city kampongs. It would maintain the population register, the postal service, the tax service, and be responsible for public health and housing inspection. It could execute some minor police duties which would require little in the way of professional training. It might enforce such city by-laws as those regulating building licences, slaughtering of animals, the selling of milk, the baking of bread and the sale of alcoholic beverages, as well as cleanliness and general order. In outlying desas, the new department might act at first only in a supervisory capacity for the wardmaster in the matter of public works.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

421

Inspection and maintenance of footpaths and roads on which there was little vehicular traffic would not require much technical skill and could be supervised by the wardmaster himself. As the Mayor pointed out, there were some 158 kilometers (about 100 miles) of such roads and paths in Semarang and their maintenance would place too much of a burden on the Department of Public Works. Similarly, inspection of temporary houses and rubbish collection in the outlying desas could be supervised by the wardmaster with the approval of the Housing Inspection and the Sanitation Service. The departments of the city government, assuming these proposals were followed, might slowly assume dual characters, in that a body of technically trained experts might work inside the city with the assistance of mechanized equipment and another body of untrained men might work in the outlying villages. The Fate of Kampong Improvement

Despite the favorable response of Semarang, the problems of kampong abolition or improvement in the city were far from settled. By 1920, the issue of the indigenous enclaves within the city boundaries was recognized. The Government had initiated enquiries for incorporation of the kampongs into the city and placing them under the jurisdiction of the city council. Legislation had been passed allowing those parts of indigenous settlement falling within city boundaries to be abolished and the constitutional guarantee of control over their internal affairs withdrawn. Semarang had investigatéd the problems and their solutions and had examined the relations between the city authorities and the kampong inhabitants. Improvement of kampong conditions seemed at hand. However, recognition of the issues and goodwill on the part of the Government and civic authorities was not sufficient to ensure the inception of programs and their success. Mostly because of lack of money, many of the projects foundered, not only in Semarang but also in the other urban municipalities of Java where kampong improvement was an issue. The first disappointment for Semarang came after the Mayor reported to the Director of the Civil Service {Directeur van het Binnenlandsch Bestuur) the findings of the commission established in 1920 at Government request. The Director replied that further discussions concerning Semarang would have to wak until the Government itself had established general principles concerning abolition which could be utilized by any city on Java. 28 The Government was waiting for the final report of the
28

Locale Belangen, 10de jaargang, 1922-1923, 1 February 1923, p. 455.

422

JAMES L. COBBAN

Assistant Resident of Semarang, J. van Gigch, who was examining the commission reports prepared by various cities in the course of his enquiry into governmental reorganization in the large urban municipalities. In 1922, he submitted his report, dated 20 September, to the Government and copies of it were sent to the city councils. Consequently, on the 5th of December 1922, the Mayor of Semarang wrote to the Governor-General enquiring if discussions of the kampong question might be continued once more. Two years later, by April 1924, the Mayor had received no reply and as evidence of his concern had undertaken discussions himself with the Resident of Semarang but, in 1925, before anything could transpire, the Resident died and it was necessary to postpone any action until his successor had been appointed.29 During this time, the members of the city council had become impatient and determined to solve the problems of kampong improvement in Semarang themselves. As a result of their meeting of 19 July 1922, the members requested of the Governor-General control over roads and public works in the city kampongs. In reply they were told once more to wait for the conclusion of then current discussions on the subject. They were also told that drains and sewers in the kampongs had always been within the jurisdiction of the city, that improvement of such conditons was not absolutely necessary, and that there would be no Government money forthcoming for improvement purposes. The rationale for this curious and contradictory reply was, in effect, that kampong inhabitants had lived in unimproved .conditions for a long time and hence could survive a while longer. It doubtless reflected the financial straits in which the Government found itself and was compatible with the economy drive which it was pursuing. By way of rebuttal, the Mayor of Semarang pointed out that the unhygienic conditions which prevailed in many of the crowded indigenous settlements on Java were accompanied by high mortality rates. Yet when kampong dwellers • sought amelioration, rather than receiving tangible improvements, they were merely referred to arguments between city and Government administrations. The Mayor despaired of Government help and decided, rather than passively observe the conditions which existed in Semarang, that the city must assume responsibility for improvements. He proposed that in its budget deliberations for 1924 the city council allocate funds for

29

Ibid., 11de jaargang, 1923-1924, 1 April 1924, p. 557.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

423

improvement and that work begin on the most urgent projects to the extent which funds would allow. The proposal was praiseworthy but, as one member of the council pointed out, Semarang also was in financial straks.30 The shortage of funds brought with it the danger of patchwork improvements. There was no guarantee that an endeavor begun one year might not have to be discontinued, incomplete, the following year. Since there was no overall plan for kampong improvement, there would be no guarantee that a project completed one year might not be rendered useless subsequently in the course of further improvements undertaken by a different department. For example, drains repaired one year might be torn up in the execution of road improvements. In this, the city council rejected the sector approach towards improvement of the urban infrastructure in favor of an overall regional plan. 31 Even if the city could provide some funds, the allocation of scarce financial resources would pose difficulties and probably cause unrest among the populations of the different kampongs. Whatever sum the council might arbitrarily set aside was bound to be insufficient for the completion of all projects and the question of priorities would arise. Small improvements made in all kampongs would hardly be impressive or make much change. Alternatively, particular kampongs could be singled out and attempts made to ameliorate conditions limited to them. But whatever decision was made, there was certain to be an outcry from the inhabitants of the unimproved settlements, since inhabitants of all kampongs would be contributing taxes to the city government. Some years later, in 1927, a meeting was held in which the inhabitants themselves were enjoined to take an active part in kampong improvement since they were the people who would benefit. The Semarang branch of Budi Utomo, a political organization for the Javanese, Sundanese and Madurese, officially recognized on 28 December 1909, called a public gathering in the city park to discuss the kampong question.32 A number of speakers addressed an audience estimated at six hundred people and reminded them of the length of time (by then some twenty
30 31

32

Ibid,, 10de jaargang, 1922-1923, 1 February 1923, p. 455. Rejection of the sector approach in the improvement of the urban infrastructure was found to be widespread among planning officials in Third World cities at the present time in a survey conducted by the Agency for International Development and published in a draft of Focus on Urban Development: Perceptions, Approaches, and Needs prepared by the Bureau for Technical Assistance, Urban Development Staff, Agency for International Development, April 1972. Locale Belangen, 14de jaargang, 16 May 1927, p. 349.

424

JAMES L. COBBAN

years) during which the kampong question had been left dangling. Speeches gave a picture of the conditions in the kampongs as they existed in the late 1920's. Living conditions were likened to those in a slum or back street. The theoretical position of the kampong as a legal person, free to exercise autonomous authority in its own affairs and having the right to elect its own government, was stated to be in great contrast with the actual facts, which showed that kampong authority for the most part had disappeared. One speaker described the village headman as little more than a Government bill-collector, no longer in control of the police or the kampong roads. The villages possessed no land and the boundaries between them and the city could no longer be distinguished. Voluntary services had been commuted mostly into taxes and were no longer sufficient for the maintenance of public works. Indeed, by 1927, the kampongs seemed little changed from a decade earlier and not much of their traditional character remained. Immigration of Indonesians from the countryside made kampong management increasingly difficult. Migrants were not subject to the customary obligations and taxes, as were the original villagers, yet they demanded village services. A motion, tangible evidence that kampong improvement was no longer exclusively a European concern, was passed approving transference of authority within the kampongs to the city council. The politicians promised widespread circulation of it to all levels of the colonial Government. The Introduction of Kampong Improvement Throughout Java The year 1927 became important in the move for improvement of kampong infrastructure not only because of the positive expression on the part of the inhabitants but also because the Government initiated some procedures which could be applied throughout Java and which eventually resulted in some success. After a decade of apparent inactivity, the Government once more took the initiative. It affirmed its old stand that kampong improvement was primarily the responsibility of civic authorities. However, it changed its position regarding funding, and while it reiterated that improvements should not become a financial burden to the State, it affirmed its readiness to contribute to the defrayment of initial costs under certain conditions. In a letter dated 10 May 1927, it proposed payment of a lump sum equal to half the expenses required to provide for initial improvements.33 These would
33

Ibid., 14de jaargang, 16 November 1927, p. 923. Reprinted in Flieringa, op. cit., pp. 43-45.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

425

include repair of such components of the urban infrastructure as roads, gutters, bridges, dikes, as well as new construction to bring about actual improvement such as paving of roads, construction of brick drains, erection of public bathing and washing places and lavatories and the introduction of street lighting. Where the need for improvement was urgent and the city council involved had no funds, the Government declared that it would pay all the initial expenses. Annual maintenance of improved kampong works, however, would still be the responsibility of the city councils. In 1927, the Government also undertook a financial study to determine what the costs of improvement might be. Up to that >car, no estimates had been made as to the expense of widening and paving kampong roads to enable them to carry heavily loaded vehicles. Nor had the costs of improvement of secondary roads and footpaths been estimated. The study was an initial attempt, but the need for more estimates of costs was clearly necessary, as was the need for an overall plan which would coordinate improvements in an orderly fashion. For this purpose, a meeting of the Mayors and heads of the Public Works Department was organized and took place early in January 1928.34 Besides accomplishing the very important task of forming a comprehensive plan for kampong improvement in all the cities of Java, the meeting agreed that improvement could proceed without the need to abolish the kampongs as legal entities. Nonetheless, improvements were slow in coming. Between 1927 and 1934, Government funds were made available to cover fifty percent of the total estimated costs of improvements in.kampongs in various cities. Between these years some 1,256,769 guilders were paid from the General Treasury to the cities. Most of this sum was paid between 1929 and 1931. After that year, because of the world depression, Government funds were withdrawn. Only a few cities were able to continue the work of kampong improvement and in most of them it came to a complete standstill. Cessation of work was regrettable since maps and plans which had been painstakingly prepared were set aside and not kept up, which meant that they would be out of date should the projects be taken up again. Towards the end of the 1930's, interest in improvement revived once more. The Government proposed a new law which would allow a subsidy of some 500,000 guilders annually to the cities for the purpose of improvements. A Kampong Improvement Commission, composed of
34

Van de Wetering, op. cit., p. 309.

426

JAMES L. COBBAN

four men, was established to advise on the use of this sum. The commission recommended what expenditures should be made for 1938 and 1939 and issued a report which included details of kampong conditions in all the cities of Java. 35 The improvements in the kampong infrastructure which the commission recommended were somewhat more encompassing than those considered twenty years previously. The concept expanded from the familiar one of roads, footpaths and sidewalks to include construction of sport fields, children's playgrounds, parks, landscaping and in some cases the purchase of land for washing places and public lavatories. Improvement funds were not to be spent on drainage, housing, malaria control, street lighting or the care of cemeteries, all of which were declared to be the direct responsibility of the civic authority. The commission estimated that it would take ten years to complete the work outlined in its report. In spite of the inability of all cities to find funds to share the costs, some progress had been made during the decade of the 1930's. Before 1938, a total of 1,917 hectares in the city kampongs of Java had been improved for a sum of 3,117,000 guilders. This was only one quarter of the kampong area for which improvement plans had been prepared. In 1939, some 4,700 hectares remained to be improved at an estimated cost of 8,000,000 guilders. Most of this area (3,500 hectares) was considered to be in need of urgent improvement. What had been accomplished and planned was regarded as remedial of past conditions. With further expansion of the cities and the inclusion of more kampongs, the area needing attention would increase, as would the need for money. In spite of these improvements, the problems were far from solved. The Government report on Town Planning published in 1938 stated that ". . . it is clear that the authorities do not have the kampong problems under control." 36 Improvements could not keep up with congestion and the increasing number of people who came to live within the city and who took up residence in the kampongs. Conclusion Examination of the kampong question in Semarang illustrates one of the characteristics of the colonial city on Java during the first half of the twentieth century. It shows that many of the problems now associated with uncontrolled urban settlements are not new and were
35

36

Eerste Verslag van de Kampongverbeteringscommissie, ingesteld bij het Gouvernementsbesluit van 25 Mei 1938, No. 30. The Indonesian Town, p. 20. T h e kampong question as it existed about 1938 is discussed on pp. 18-21.

UNCONTROLLED URBAN SETTLEMENT

427

present in essence over half a century ago. Lack of money was the most important factor affecting adoption of kampong improvement and is probably the greatest impediment affecting change in crowded urban enclaves today. The kampong folks' inability for self help is not always paralleled at the present time, as reports from some countries show, but ad hoc uncoordinated efforts were as shunned then as now and rejected in favour of overall comprehensive plans. Overlapping of jurisdictions at different levels of government was a threat to improvement efforts but was overcome during colonial times in a way easier than is now possible in most countries. The conflict of values and breakdown of traditionalism which was a characteristic fifty years ago still occurs but the emphasis now is more on rural and urban life under a national government and less on the juxtaposition of European and Indonesian societies. There are, of course, contrasts between the two types of settlements. The most notable difference is probably that the magnitude of the present problems is much greater than anything previously encountered. The number of people affected is larger today but there are fewer restrictions preventing people from partaking in the social and economie life of the modern city compared to the limited opportunities in the class conscious colonial city. Certainly the potential for political influence in most cities is much greater with the modern squatter than it was with the token representation of kampong folk on the city councils fifty years ago. Furthermore, the colonial government in Indonesia was dealing with what began as functioning village entities with full legal title to their land, in contrast to most countries today, where new settlements spring up sometimes overnight on unoccupied, usually government-owned, land. Nonetheless, these differences do not detract from the historical interest of the problems of the kampong question as precursors of those posed by the squatter settlements in Southeast Asia and other countries of the Third World, nor do they invalidate the insight into one of the processes of urban growth in Indonesia. The final outcome of the kampong question before the Pacific War, after twenty-five years of endeavor and only partial success, in spite of the goodwill of the colonial officials, does lead to consideration whether uncontrolled urban settlements, however distinguished, will ever attain the standards of physical environment maintained in other parts of the city. Nevertheless, it does not indicate that attempts towards improvement of the infrastructure of uncontrolled urban settlements should not be undertaken.
Ohio University, Athens, U.S.A. •