TESTIMONY OF TRAVELLERS AND THINKERS
(_Continued_)
[Sidenote: American Opinion.]
The three authorities whose testimony was given in the preceding
chapter are all distinguished travellers of British nationality.
It is now proposed to lay before the reader the opinions held upon
Belgian Administration in the Congo by three well-known Americans—Mr.
James Gustavus Whiteley of Baltimore, member of the Institute of
International Law, who has represented the United States Government
at several international congresses; the Rev. W. H. Leslie, a
missionary of the American Baptist Missionary Union; and Mr. Mohun, a
former United States Consul at Boma.
MR. JAMES G. WHITELEY
It is unfortunate that so many false impressions about the Congo
have been accepted without examination. For example, there is a
popular belief that the King runs the Congo “for revenue only,”
and that he oppresses the natives in order to extort money from
them. The exact opposite is the truth. The King receives no
revenue from the Congo Government; on the contrary the State owes
its very existence to the generosity of the King, who advanced
several million dollars to keep the Government going in its early
struggle for existence. It is true that there are in the Congo
extensive Crown lands, the revenue from which belongs to the King,
but His Majesty refuses to take the receipts from this land and
has turned the money into a fund for the erection of schools, the
encouragement of science, and similar purposes. He does not even
manage the fund himself, but has placed it in the hands of three
trustees.
I have seen the statement in several newspapers that the Congo
State was created by the Berlin Conference in 1885 and placed
in the hands of King Leopold for administration, the Powers
reserving a sort of right of guardianship over it. This is entirely
erroneous. The Congo was a sovereign State before the Berlin
Conference was thought of. The first official acknowledgment of
the new State came from the United States in the spring of 1884.
It was afterwards formally recognised by the other nations, and it
entered the Berlin Conference on an equality with the other Powers.
It has never placed itself under the guardianship of any Power or
collection of Powers. It has no connection with Belgium except the
fact that King Leopold happens to be king of each of them. The two
Governments are entirely independent.
One of the great achievements of the Congo State has been the
suppression of the Arab slave-traders, who were in the habit
of invading Central Africa, carrying off slaves to the eastern
markets, and laying waste the country through which they passed.
It is estimated that 100,000 natives were killed each year in
these slave raids. I recently saw an erroneous statement to the
effect that the slave raids are still carried on, and that they are
encouraged by King Leopold and his agents as a means of revenue. It
is difficult to see how the King or his Government could reap any
profit by encouraging the slave-raiders to destroy the villages,
and kill off a hundred thousand or so of the inhabitants. Such
lack of logic is damaging to the case of the gentlemen who put it
forward as a serious argument. As Lord Westbury once said to a
young English barrister: “Never make a mistake in your logic; the
facts are always at your disposal.”
[Illustration: Melting Latex of Rubber in Forest of Lusambo
(Lusambo-Kassai).]
In this case, however, the anti-Congo critics have availed
themselves of both false logic and false “facts.” The facts are
that the slave-raiders were finally vanquished and driven out by
the Congo forces in the early nineties, after a severe struggle and
at the cost of much Belgian blood. As the present Viceroy of India
said some years ago: “The Congo Free State has done a great work
and by its administration the cruel raids of the Arab slave-dealers
have ceased to exist over many thousand square miles.”
Another prevalent error about the Congo Government is in regard to
the treatment of the natives by the officials. An impression has
got abroad that there are many atrocities committed.
There have been cases in which the natives have been maltreated by
minor officials, but these are isolated cases, and are severely
punished by the authorities. Such cases have occurred in all public
services where an attempt has been made to govern inferior races.
Such things have happened in the Philippines, in British Africa,
and in India. No colonising nation can cast a stone at King Leopold
on that score. Among a large number of officials scattered over
a vast territory there will often be one or two wicked stewards
who despitefully use the natives. All that any State can do is to
keep vigilant watch and to punish the wrongdoers, and this the
Congo State has done. It has even established a Commission for the
protection of the natives. By the decree of 1896, this Commission
consisted of seven members, three being Catholic priests and four
Protestant missionaries.
It has been said, among other things, that the State practically
enslaves the natives by forcing them to pay a tax in labour. The
tax is light. According to a statement made the other day by Baron
de Favereau, it consists of 40 hours’ work per month, and for
this work they are paid at the regular rate of wages obtained in
the district. It is a tax which helps the State and also helps
the native, for it teaches him to work. It is one of the most
civilising influences in African colonisation, for it is only by
teaching habits of industry to the natives that civilisation can
make any progress in the Dark Continent.
The detractors of the Congo administration make a great outcry,
but as Burke said in one of his celebrated speeches: “You must not
think because the crickets make a great noise that they are the
only inhabitants of the field. The cattle browsing in the shade
make less stir, but they are infinitely more important.” Those
who cry out against the Congo are a small band, and generally of
small importance. Their evidence is light in comparison with the
testimony of such men as the Count de Smet de Naeyer, the Baron
van Eetvelde, Baron Wahis, the Chevalier Descamps, and Mr. Nys,
but if these witnesses be considered as in any way prejudiced on
account of their official positions, you have only to look at
the evidence of Sir Harry Johnston, late British Commissioner to
Uganda, as well as the evidence of such men as Cardinal Lavigerie,
Paul Leroy-Beaulieu, the great authority on political economy, Mr.
Pickersgill, the British Consul, besides the missionaries, such as
the Rev. G. Grenfell, of the British Baptist Missionary Society,
Mgr. Augouard, Rev. Holman Bentley, Father van Hencxthoven, Rev.
Herbert S. Smith, Mgr. Streicher, Rev. Lawson Forfeit, Father
Gabriel, and Rev. W. Verner of the American Presbyterian Mission.
The Congo State furnishes a model for civilisation in new
countries. A great work has been accomplished in Equatorial Africa,
and, as a distinguished missionary said, “Posterity will place the
name of Leopold at the head of human benefactors for the princely
enterprise, perseverance, and sacrifices contributed by him in such
a cause.”
THE REV. W. H. LESLIE
In a recent number of the _Missionary Review of the World_, a
magazine published by Messrs. Funk & Wagnalls of New York, there
appeared an article written by the Rev. W. H. Leslie, a missionary
of the American Baptist Missionary Union, stationed in the Congo.
In that article Mr. Leslie refers to the exceeding degradation of
the Congo people twenty years ago. He states that, naturally, not a
little evil remains, that immorality and various heathen practices
are still prevalent. But he speaks with much enthusiasm of the social
and moral uplifting and the industrial development within that twenty
years. He says that the people are learning to work, are learning
to read and write, are clothing themselves, and are building better
houses. In other words, they are gradually adopting the manners and
customs of civilisation.
MR. MOHUN
Of course you must understand that for the moment I am in the
service of the Congo Free State, and a great many people might
consider anything I should say in favour of the Congo as being
biased; but I can assure you that, in my opinion, it would be
impossible for any one to give other than a favourable report
on the work of the Free State in the Eastern province. The
administration is excellent. The country is quite quiet from the
Falls to Tanganyika. The native tribes seem contented and happy,
and are paid by the Government for every stroke of work they do.
The price of rubber has increased, and every man who brings in
rubber receives pay for it. Formerly robbery and murder existed to
a great extent among the native tribes, but are now quite rare;
and the old “Mwavi,” or ordeal by drinking poison, seems to be
disappearing. Justice is administered with an impartial hand, and I
firmly believe the natives are beginning to appreciate the benefits
of good government.
Some months ago a woman was shot dead near my camp. I immediately
sent for the chief, and told him I wanted the murderer arrested
and brought in. Three hours later he returned with him and also
two accessories to the crime, together with all the stuffs they
had stolen from the woman. The principal actor in the crime
was tried and hanged, while the others received long terms of
punishment. This incident is merely cited to show that when the
natives are living in a contented way, and are satisfied with
their surroundings, they will assist the Europeans wherever
possible. I could enumerate a dozen cases where natives have
themselves arrested and brought to justice thieves, ravishers,
&c., of their own accord. They never received a present for these
services. In the Manyema, which is very thickly populated, a great
market has been established at Vieux Kasongo, and this serves as
a meeting-place for thousands twice a week. Caravans come from
Ujiji nearly every month, and the natives journey there by a 15 or
20 days’ march. I never saw a disturbance at the market, either
going or returning. By common consent guns, knives, spears, and
knobkerries are excluded from articles of exchange, and the men
only carry thin walking-sticks. There are no soldiers guarding the
market, but immunity from thieves is guaranteed by some ten or
twelve native policemen, who receive no pay, and are highly pleased
to have an opportunity of showing their authority.
I have been astonished in coming down river from Kasongo to
the coast to see what extraordinary changes have taken place.
First, the administration is now established on a good, firm
basis, and all the officials take an intelligent interest in
their work, with the result that scandals are quite a thing of
the past. The stations are all splendidly and solidly built in
brick, and the grounds are laid out in a very pleasing way. The
transport service by canoe between Kasongo and Stanley Falls goes
without a hitch, and thousands of loads go up river every year,
absolutely unguarded, and the loss by theft is almost _nil_.
The steamer service between the Falls and Pool is good, and an
enormous improvement over the old days, especially in the matter
of messing. The large steamers _Hainaut_ and _Brabant_ are most
imposing-looking craft, and comfortably fitted up. They carry 200
tons of cargo and 600 troops, in addition to 40 white passengers.
The new steamer _La Flandre_, of 250 tons, is on the slip at Leo,
and I think will make her first trip in February next year (1904).
She is to be lighted by electricity. So far as I know, the whole
country is tranquil, with the exception of a small portion of the
Bangala district north of Bumba.
It has been the fashion during the past for travellers who have
been in the Congo State to run it down in every way, but it gives
me the greatest pleasure to be able to affirm that only a most
captious critic would be able to find fault with its administration
to-day.
With regard to specific pronouncement on the alleged murder of
several hundred natives who failed to supply the required quota
of rubber, I can say nothing, it having been out of my district.
Personally, I do not believe it, excepting in a vastly modified
degree; and I must point out that the authorities are taking
such steps as must bring any offenders to summary justice. I
absolutely deny the absurd attempt to fasten responsibilities upon
the authorities for any acts of violence they cannot control from
this side. Such acts committed while I was there would have been
reported, and it is evident they are now taking steps to prevent,
in so far as possible, any recurrence of them. In all human
institutions there are imperfections; here and there _employees_
prove themselves unworthy of the trust reposed in them; but these,
in my opinion, are exceptions rather than the rule.