In this direction, Oucho1 noticed that ‘the history of colonialism provides overwhelming evidence of how manipulation of more friendly people to conquer more stubborn people, through primitive expeditions of denial of basic social services to the latter, laid firm foundations for conflict-in-waiting, a time bomb which exploded when the colonial administration was succeeded by independent governments’. As a direct result of the above situation, in most cases those ethnic conflicts have appeared in post-colonial areas the ‘former colonial powers simplistically dismissed them as the result of tribalism, without bothering to trace their evolution, maturity and eventually their occurrence’2.Of course such a finding, cannot lead to the assumption that the inappropriate administrative initiatives of the former colonial powers are the exclusive causes of the problems that the post-colonial areas face today. However, it is a fact that there is a strong relationship between the actions of the former that cause the latter severe turbulences in their entire social and financial framework. In this paper, the intervention of European states and particularly of Britain in the East Africa region with a special reference to Kenya is the main issue under examination. At the next level, the role of Britain in the development of Kenya is being analyzed trying to evaluate the role of the former to the financial and social progress – if any – of the latter.Africa has been a continent that suffered – and still does – a lot from the imperialistic activities of foreign countries, especially the European ones. In this context, Cain et al.3 found that ‘during the first half of the nineteenth-century reform and development made disappointingly slow progress in Africa, as indeed elsewhere while the belief that unfree labor was incompatible with modern capitalism.