By 1949 the delicate balance of the Bafut political system had been upset by the loss of sovereignty. The office of the Fon had undergone the most significant change, its prestige battered early in the German period and then patched up again to serve their interests. When the colonial authorities picked out the chief they supported him to the exclusion of the other organs of government such as Kwifor. This became a tool in the hands of the Fon to carry out his obligations to the white man. The independent position of Kwifor was therefore compromised.

As the Fon came to realise that whatever power and influence he wielded depended on the white man he became increasingly isolated form his age-long advisors. The British reinforced this feeling by the deferential treatment they accorded him - a gilded state umbrella, a Union Jack to fly over the palace and a portrait of the sovereign to display in the audience hall. In 1946 Achirimbi was awarded the Certificate of Honour 'as a record of the valuable services rendered by him to his own country and people and to the British Government... and loyal services given to the Administration in the maintenance of good order'. The other chiefs did not take this kindly and wanted their own regalia, not so much out of love for the British flag and majesty but rather to boost their egos.

In such an elevated position Achirimbi took advantage of his favourable standing with the administration and sought compensation for loss of sovereignty to arrogate to himself the residual powers the sub-chiefs, the Batangchuo, had retained over land matters and other disputes. The latter found themselves increasingly by-passed as their economic position became difficult; for instance, the Batangchuo collected taxes on behalf of the Fon but only he received the collectors' rebates. The Fon was felt to have become increasingly arbitrary with the result that public confidence in him fell as it became evident that he was no longer adequately guided by Kwifor counsel. His decisions no longer represented the collective view of Fon and advisers. However, as far as the administration was concerned he was one of the few rulers considered as being progressive as he was willing to experiment with new ideas. Colonial administrators treated him with great respect and nationalist politicians followed suit.

The people of Bafut experienced two colonial eras and were quick to draw sharp distinctions between the German and British administrations. The Blut und Eisen discipline of the Ngu-u ba Jaman (German era), particularly with regard to their wars and seemingly off-hand manner of justice, contrasted with the Ngu-u Inglisi (English era). The latter is also known as the 'Question era', apparently in reference to English legal procedure which, in the local view, perpetuated rather than prevented crime. This was considered to result in indiscipline in society since a smart person could avoid justice by arguing his way out of trouble.

In conclusion this essay has demonstrated some of the fundamental differences between German and British administrative policies and in their application. In the case of Bafut the distinction between German and British colonial rule is clearly noticeable in the reaction of the people. Both colonial powers faced problems in administration that resulted from their attempts to use indigenous political institutions for their own purposes. The problems which British administrators faced in effecting their administrative policies among the Bafut were similar to those which they faced in those parts of Southern Nigeria with similar political institutions. In other respects this period of colonial administration may have been only one episode in the relatively long history of the Bafut chiefdom but it was an episode which significantly affected Bafut society.