‘Repaying the National Debt to Africa’: Trusteeship, Property and Empire William Bain Abstract: This article explores the way in which the idea of trusteeship shaped questions relating to property and possession in nineteenth-century sub-Saha- ran Africa. Trusteeship is distinctive insofar as it sanctioned European domin- ion over territories in Africa while preserving an indigenous right in the wealth contained in these territories. The article illuminates the character of this rela- tionship, first, by arguing that a narrative that reduces empire to a story of domination and exploitation ends up obscuring the complex property relations entailed by trusteeship. Second, it describes the introduction of trusteeship into the political, economic and social life of sub-Saharan Africa, focusing mainly on the experience of British colonial administration and the Berlin Conference of 1884–5. Third, it clarifies a relationship of unequal reciprocity that joined European commercial interests with the well-being of the so-called ‘native’ tribes of Africa. Keywords: Africa, imperialism, international administration, property, state- building, trusteeship The purpose of this essay is to interrogate the bearing of trusteeship on ques- tions of property and possession in (imperial) sub-Saharan Africa. Trusteeship is distinctive insofar as it sanctions alien rule while rejecting gratuitous dom- ination and exploitation. Residing at the heart of the idea of trusteeship is a separation of right and dominion, according to which the enjoyment of the thing held in trust is distinct from exercising control over that thing. The noto- rious Berlin Conference of 1884–5 internationalised this pattern of relations when European powers, joined by the Ottoman Empire, established interna- tional legal obligations pertaining to the welfare of ‘native tribes’ residing in the conventional basin of the Congo. Trusteeship exerted enormous influence in shaping questions of property insofar as it conditioned ownership on a notion of right use. This essay seeks to clarify the arguments that underpin this mode of thinking. It does so in three parts. First, I want to suggest that the persistence of a narrative that reduces the history of empire to a story of dom- ination and exploitation ends up obscuring the complex and sometimes para- doxical property relations that are entailed by trusteeship. Second, I want to Theoria, December 2012 doi:10.3167/th.2012.5913301 01-Bains_Layout 1 9/21/12 11:37 AM Page 1