Produced by Bryan Ness and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
THE CRIME OF THE CONGO
The Crime of the Congo
By A. Conan Doyle
Author of The Great Boer War, etc., etc.
New York
Doubleday, Page & Company
Mcmix
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, INCLUDING THAT OF TRANSLATION
INTO FOREIGN LANGUAGES, INCLUDING THE SCANDINAVIAN
COPYRIGHT, 1909, BY DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY
PUBLISHED, NOVEMBER, 1909
COPYRIGHT, 1909, BY A. CONAN DOYLE
PREFACE
There are many of us in England who consider the crime which has been
wrought in the Congo lands by King Leopold of Belgium and his followers to
be the greatest which has ever been known in human annals. Personally I am
strongly of that opinion. There have been great expropriations like that
of the Normans in England or of the English in Ireland. There have been
massacres of populations like that of the South Americans by the Spaniards
or of subject nations by the Turks. But never before has there been such a
mixture of wholesale expropriation and wholesale massacre all done under
an odious guise of philanthropy and with the lowest commercial motives as
a reason. It is this sordid cause and the unctious hypocrisy which makes
this crime unparalleled in its horror.
The witnesses of the crime are of all nations, and there is no possibility
of error concerning facts. There are British consuls like Casement,
Thesiger, Mitchell and Armstrong, all writing in their official capacity
with every detail of fact and date. There are Frenchmen like Pierre Mille
and Felicien Challaye, both of whom have written books upon the subject.
There are missionaries of many races--Harris, Weeks and Stannard
(British); Morrison, Clarke and Shepherd (American); Sjoblom (Swedish) and
Father Vermeersch, the Jesuit. There is the eloquent action of the Italian
Government, who refused to allow Italian officers to be employed any
longer in such hangman's work, and there is the report of the Belgian
commission, the evidence before which was suppressed because it was too
dreadful for publication; finally, there is the incorruptible evidence of
the kodak. Any American citizen who will glance at Mark Twain's "King
Leopold's Soliloquy" will see some samples of that. A perusal of all of
these sources of information will show that there is not a grotesque,
obscene or ferocious torture which human ingenuity could invent which has
not been used against these harmless and helpless people.
This would, to my mind, warrant our intervention in any case. Turkey has
several times been interfered with simply on the general ground of
humanity. There is in this instance a very special reason why America and
England should not stand by and see these people done to death. They are,
in a sense, their wards. America was the first to give official
recognition to King Leopold's enterprise in 1884, and so has the
responsibility of having actually put him into that position which he has
so dreadfully abused. She has been the indirect and innocent cause of the
whole tragedy. Surely some reparation is due. On the other hand England
has, with the other European Powers, signed the treaty of 1885, by which
each and all of them make it responsible for the condition of the native
races. The other Powers have so far shown no desire to live up to this
pledge. But the conscience of England is uneasy and she is slowly rousing
herself to act. Will America be behind?
At this moment two American citizens, Shepherd and that noble Virginian,
Morrison, are about to be tried at Boma for telling the truth about the
scoundrels. Morrison in the dock makes a finer Statue of Liberty than
Bartholdi's in New York harbour.
Attempts will be made in America (for the Congo has its paid apologists
everywhere) to pretend that England wants to oust Belgium from her colony
and take it herself. Such accusations are folly. To run a tropical colony
honestly without enslaving the natives is an expensive process. For
example Nigeria, the nearest English colony, has to be subsidized to the
extent of $2,000,000 a year. Whoever takes over the Congo will,
considering its present demoralized condition, have a certain expense of
$10,000,000 a year for twenty years. Belgium has not run the colony. It
has simply sacked it, forcing the inhabitants without pay to ship
everything of value to Antwerp. No decent European Power could do this.
For many years to come the Congo will be a heavy expense and it will truly
be a philanthropic call upon the next owner. I trust it will not fall to
England.
Attempts have been made too (for there is considerable ingenuity and
unlimited money on the other side) to pretend that it is a question of
Protestant missions against Catholic. Any one who thinks this should read
the book, "La Question Kongolaise," of the eloquent and holy Jesuit,
Father Vermeersch. He lived in the country and, as he says, it was the
sight of the "immeasurable misery," which drove him to write.
We English who are earnest over this matter look eagerly to the westward
to see some sign of moral support of material leading. It would be a grand
sight to see the banner of humanity and civilization carried forward in
such a cause by the two great English-speaking nations.
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE.
INTRODUCTION
I am convinced that the reason why public opinion has not been more
sensitive upon the question of the Congo Free State, is that the terrible
story has not been brought thoroughly home to the people. Mr. E. D. Morel
has done the work of ten men, and the Congo Reform Association has
struggled hard with very scanty means; but their time and energies have,
for the most part, been absorbed in dealing with each fresh phase of the
situation as it arose. There is room, therefore, as it seemed to me, for a
general account which would cover the whole field and bring the matter up
to date. This account must necessarily be a superficial one, if it is to
be produced at such a size and such a price, as will ensure its getting at
that general public for which it has been prepared. Yet it contains the
essential facts, and will enable the reader to form his own opinion upon
the situation.
Should he, after reading it, desire to help in the work of forcing this
question to the front, he can do so in several ways. He can join the Congo
Reform Association (Granville House, Arundel Street, W. C.). He can write
to his local member and aid in getting up local meetings to ventilate the
question. Finally, he can pass this book on and purchase other copies, for
any profits will be used in setting the facts before the French and German
public.
It may be objected that this is ancient history, and that the greater part
of it refers to a period before the Congo State was annexed to Belgium on
August 10th, 1908. But responsibility cannot be so easily shaken off. The
Congo State was founded by the Belgian King, and exploited by Belgian
capital, Belgian soldiers and Belgian concessionnaires. It was defended
and upheld by successive Belgian Governments, who did all they could to
discourage the Reformers. In spite of legal quibbles, it is an insult to
common sense to suppose that the responsibility for the Congo has not
always rested with Belgium. The Belgian machinery was always ready to help
and defend the State, but never to hold it in control and restrain it from
crime.
One chance Belgium had. If immediately upon taking over the State they had
formed a Judicial Commission for the rigid inspection of the whole matter,
with power to punish for all past offences, and to examine all the
scandals of recent years, then they would have done something to clear the
past. If on the top of that they had freed the land, given up the system
of forced labour entirely, and cancelled the charters of all the
concessionnaire companies, for the obvious reason that they have
notoriously abused their powers, then Belgium could go forward in its
colonizing enterprise on the same terms as other States, with her sins
expiated so far as expiation is now possible.
She did none of these things. For a year now she has herself persevered in
the evil ways of her predecessor. Her colony is a scandal before the whole
world. The era of murders and mutilations has, as we hope, passed by, but
the country is sunk into a state of cowed and hopeless slavery. It is not
a new story, but merely another stage of the same story. When Belgium took
over the Congo State, she took over its history and its responsibilities
also. What a load that was is indicated in these pages.
The record of the dates is the measure of our patience. Can any one say
that we are precipitate if we now brush aside vain words and say
definitely that the matter has to be set right by a certain near date, or
that we will appeal to each and all of the Powers, with the evidence
before them, to assist us in setting it right? If the Powers refuse to do
so, then it is our duty to honour the guarantees which we made as to the
safety of these poor people, and to turn to the task of setting it right
ourselves. If the Powers join in, or give us a mandate, all the better.
But we have a mandate from something higher than the Powers which obliges
us to act.
Sir Edward Grey has told us in his speech of July 22nd, 1909, that a
danger to European peace lies in the matter. Let us look this danger
squarely in the face. Whence does it come? Is it from Germany, with her
traditions of kindly home life--is this the power which would raise a hand
to help the butchers of the Mongalla and of the Domaine de la Couronne? Is
it likely that those who so justly admire the splendid private and public
example of William II. would draw the sword for Leopold? Both in the name
of trade rights and in that of humanity Germany has a long score to settle
on the Congo. Or is it the United States which would stand in the way,
when her citizens have vied with our own in withstanding and exposing
these iniquities? Or, lastly, is France the danger? There are those who
think that because France has capital invested in these enterprises,
because the French Congo has itself degenerated under the influence and
example of its neighbour, and because France holds a right of pre-emption,
that therefore our trouble lies across the Channel. For my own part, I
cannot believe it. I know too well the generous, chivalrous instincts of
the French people. I know, also, that their colonial record during
centuries has been hardly inferior to our own. Such traditions are not
lightly set aside, and all will soon be right again when a strong Colonial
Minister turns his attention to the concessionnaires in the French Congo.
They will remember de Brazza's dying words: "Our Congo must not be turned
into a Mongalla." It is an impossibility that France could ally herself
with King Leopold, and certainly if such were, indeed, the case, the
_entente cordiale_ would be strained to breaking. Surely, then, if these
three Powers, the ones most directly involved, have such obvious reasons
for helping, rather than hindering, we may go forward without fear. But if
it were not so, if all Europe frowned upon our enterprise, we would not be
worthy to be the sons of our fathers if we did not go forward on the plain
path of national duty.
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE.
Windlesham, Crowborough,
September, 1909.
CONTENTS
PAGE
Preface iii
Introduction vii
How the Congo Free State Came to be Founded 3
The Development of the Congo State 9
The Working of the System 22
First Fruits of the System 27
Further Fruits of the System 39
Voices from the Darkness 46
Consul Roger Casement's Report 57
King Leopold's Commission and Its Report 68
The Congo After the Commission 87
Some Catholic Testimony as to the Congo 97
The Evidence Up to Date 102
The Political Situation 114
Some Congolese Apologies 118
Solutions 123
Appendix 127
THE CRIME OF THE CONGO
I
HOW THE CONGO FREE STATE CAME TO BE FOUNDED
In the earlier years of his reign King Leopold of Belgium began to display
that interest in Central Africa which for a long time was ascribed to
nobility and philanthropy, until the contrast between such motives, and
the actual unscrupulous commercialism, became too glaring to be sustained.
As far back as the year 1876 he called a conference of humanitarians and
travellers, who met at Brussels for the purpose of debating various plans
by which the Dark Continent might be opened up. From this conference
sprang the so-called International African Association, which, in spite of
its name, was almost entirely a Belgian body, with the Belgian King as
President. Its professed object was the exploration of the country and the
founding of stations which should be rest-houses for travellers and
centres of civilization.
On the return of Stanley from his great journey in 1878, he was met at
Marseilles by a representative from the King of Belgium, who enrolled the
famous traveller as an agent for his Association. The immediate task given
to Stanley was to open up the Congo for trade, and to make such terms with
the natives as would enable stations to be built and depots established.
In 1879 Stanley was at work with characteristic energy. His own intentions
were admirable. "We shall require but mere contact," he wrote, "to satisfy
the natives that our intentions are pure and honourable, seeking their own
good, materially and socially, more than our own interests. We go to
spread what blessings arise from amiable and just intercourse with people
who have been strangers to them." Stanley was a hard man, but he was no
hypocrite. What he said he undoubtedly meant. It is worth remarking, in
view of the accounts of the laziness or stupidity of the natives given by
King Leopold's apologists in order to justify their conduct toward them,
that Stanley had the very highest opinion of their industry and commercial
ability. The following extracts from his writings set this matter beyond
all doubt:
"Bolobo is a great centre for the ivory and camwood powder trade,
principally because its people are so enterprising."
Of Irebu--"a Venice of the Congo"--he says:
"These people were really acquainted with many lands and tribes on the
Upper Congo. From Stanley Pool to Upoto, a distance of 6,000 miles,
they knew every landing-place on the river banks. All the ups and
downs of savage life, all the profits and losses derived from barter,
all the diplomatic arts used by tactful savages, were as well known to
them as the Roman alphabet to us.... No wonder that all this
commercial knowledge had left its traces on their faces; indeed, it is
the same as in your own cities in Europe. Know you not the military
man among you, the lawyer and the merchant, the banker, the artist, or
the poet? It is the same in Africa, MORE ESPECIALLY ON THE CONGO,
WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE SO DEVOTED TO TRADE."
"During the few days of our mutual intercourse they gave us a high
idea of their qualities--industry, after their own style, not being
the least conspicuous."
"As in the old time, Umangi, from the right bank, and Mpa, from the
left bank, despatched their representatives with ivory tusks, large
and small, goats and sheep, and vegetable food, clamorously demanding
that we should buy from them. Such urgent entreaties, accompanied with
blandishments to purchase their stock, were difficult to resist."
"I speak of eager native traders following us for miles for the
smallest piece of cloth. I mention that after travelling many miles to
obtain cloth for ivory and redwood powder, the despairing natives
asked: 'Well, what is it you do want? Tell us, and we will get it for
you.'"
Speaking of English scepticism as to King Leopold's intentions, he says:
"Though they understand the satisfaction of a sentiment when applied
to England, they are slow to understand that it may be a sentiment
that induced King Leopold II. to father this International
Association. He is a dreamer, like his _confreres_ in the work,
because the sentiment is applied to the neglected millions of the Dark
Continent. They cannot appreciate rightly, because there are no
dividends attaching to it, this ardent, vivifying and expansive
sentiment, which seeks to extend civilizing influences among the dark
races, and to brighten up with the glow of civilization the dark
places of sad-browed Africa."
One cannot let these extracts pass without noting that Bolobo, the first
place named by Stanley, has sunk in population from 40,000 to 7,000; that
Irebu, called by Stanley the populous Venice of the Congo, had in 1903 a
population of fifty; that the natives who used to follow Stanley,
beseeching him to trade, now, according to Consul Casement, fly into the
bush at the approach of a steamer, and that the unselfish sentiment of
King Leopold II. has developed into dividends of 300 per cent. per annum.
Such is the difference between Stanley's anticipation and the actual
fulfilment.
Untroubled, however, with any vision as to the destructive effects of his
own work, Stanley laboured hard among the native chiefs, and returned to
his employer with no less than 450 alleged treaties which transferred land
to the Association. We have no record of the exact payment made in order
to obtain these treaties, but we have the terms of a similar transaction
carried out by a Belgian officer in 1883 at Palabala. In this case the
payment made to the Chief consisted of "one coat of red cloth with gold
facings, one red cap, one white tunic, one piece of white baft, one piece
of red points, one box of liqueurs, four demijohns of rum, two boxes of
gin, 128 bottles of gin, twenty red handkerchiefs, forty singlets and
forty old cotton caps." It is clear that in making such treaties the Chief
thought that he was giving permission for the establishment of a station.
The idea that he was actually bartering away the land was never even in
his mind, for it was held by a communal tenure for the whole tribe, and it
was not his to barter. And yet it is on the strength of such treaties as
these that twenty millions of people have been expropriated, and the whole
wealth and land of the country proclaimed to belong, not to the
inhabitants, but to the State--that is, to King Leopold.
With this sheaf of treaties in his portfolio the King of the Belgians now
approached the Powers with high sentiments of humanitarianism, and with a
definite request that the State which he was forming should receive some
recognized status among the nations. Was he at that time consciously
hypocritical? Did he already foresee how widely his future actions would
differ from his present professions? It is a problem which will interest
the historian of the future, who may have more materials than we upon
which to form a judgment. On the one hand, there was a furtive secrecy
about the evolution of his plans and the despatch of his expeditions which
should have no place in a philanthropic enterprise. On the other hand,
there are limits to human powers of deception, and it is almost
inconceivable that a man who was acting a part could so completely deceive
the whole civilized world. It is more probable, as it seems to me, that
his ambitious mind discerned that it was possible for him to acquire a
field of action which his small kingdom could not give, in mixing himself
with the affairs of Africa. He chose the obvious path, that of a
civilizing and elevating mission, taking the line of least resistance
without any definite idea whither it might lead him. Once faced with the
facts, his astute brain perceived the great material possibilities of the
country; his early dreams faded away to be replaced by unscrupulous
cupidity, and step by step he was led downward until he, the man of holy
aspirations in 1885, stands now in 1909 with such a cloud of terrible
direct personal responsibility resting upon him as no man in modern
European history has had to bear.
It is, indeed, ludicrous, with our knowledge of the outcome, to read the
declarations of the King and of his representatives at that time. They
were actually forming the strictest of commercial monopolies--an
organization which was destined to crush out all general private trade in
a country as large as the whole of Europe with Russia omitted. That was
the admitted outcome of their enterprise. Now listen to M. Beernaert, the
Belgian Premier, speaking in the year 1885:
"The State, of which our King will be the Sovereign, will be a sort of
international Colony. There will be no monopolies, no privileges....
Quite the contrary: absolute freedom of commerce, freedom of property,
freedom of navigation."
Here, too, are the words of Baron Lambermont, the Belgian Plenipotentiary
at the Berlin Conference:
"The temptation to impose abusive taxes will find its corrective, if
need be, in the freedom of commerce.... No doubt exists as to the
strict and literal meaning of the term 'in commercial matters.' It
means ... the unlimited right for every one to buy and to sell."
The question of humanity is so pressing that it obscures that of the
broken pledges about trade, but on the latter alone there is ample reason
to say that every condition upon which this State was founded has been
openly and notoriously violated, and that, therefore, its title-deeds are
vitiated from the beginning.
At the time the professions of the King made the whole world his
enthusiastic allies. The United States was the first to hasten to give
formal recognition to the new State. May it be the first, also, to realize
the truth and to take public steps to retract what it has done. The
churches and the Chambers of Commerce of Great Britain were all for
Leopold, the one attracted by the prospect of pushing their missions into
the heart of Africa, the others delighted at the offer of an open market
for their produce. At the Congress of Berlin, which was called to regulate
the situation, the nations vied with each other in furthering the plans of
the King of the Belgians and in extolling his high aims. The Congo Free
State was created amid general rejoicings. The veteran Bismarck, as
credulous as the others, pronounced its baptismal blessing. "The New Congo
State is called upon," said he, "to become one of the chief promoters of
the work" (of civilization) "which we have in view, and I pray for its
prosperous development and for the fulfilment of the noble aspirations of
its illustrious founder." Such was the birth of the Congo Free State. Had
the nations gathered round been able to perceive its future, the betrayal
of religion and civilization of which it would be guilty, the immense
series of crimes which it would perpetrate throughout Central Africa, the
lowering of the prestige of all the white races, they would surely have
strangled the monster in its cradle.
It is not necessary to record in this statement the whole of the
provisions of the Berlin Congress. Two only will suffice, as they are at
the same time the most important and the most flagrantly abused. The first
of these (which forms the fifth article of the agreement) proclaims that
"No Power which exercises sovereign rights in the said regions shall be
allowed to grant therein either monopoly or privilege of any kind in
commercial matters." No words could be clearer than that, but the Belgian
representatives, conscious that such a clause must disarm all opposition,
went out of their way to accentuate it. "No privileged situation can be
created in this respect," they said. "The way remains open without any
restriction to free competition in the sphere of commerce." It would be
interesting now to send a British or German trading expedition up the
Congo in search of that free competition which has been so explicitly
promised, and to see how it would fare between the monopolist Government
and the monopolist companies who have divided the land between them. We
have travelled some distance since Prince Bismarck at the last sitting of
the Conference declared that the result was "to secure to the commerce of
all nations free access to the centre of the African Continent."
More important, however, is Article VI., both on account of the issues at
stake, and because the signatories of the treaty bound themselves
solemnly, "in the name of Almighty God," to watch over its enforcement. It
ran: "All the Powers exercising sovereign rights or influence in these
territories pledge themselves to watch over the preservation of the native
populations and the improvement of their moral and material conditions of
existence, and to work together for the suppression of slavery and of the
slave trade." That was the pledge of the united nations of Europe. It is a
disgrace to each of them, including ourselves, the way in which they have
fulfilled that oath. Before their eyes, as I shall show in the sequel,
they have had enacted one long, horrible tragedy, vouched for by priests
and missionaries, traders, travellers and consuls, all corroborated, but
in no way reformed, by a Belgium commission of inquiry. They have seen
these unhappy people, who were their wards, robbed of all they possessed,
debauched, degraded, mutilated, tortured, murdered, all on such a scale as
has never, to my knowledge, occurred before in the whole course of
history, and now, after all these years, with all the facts notorious, we
are still at the stage of polite diplomatic expostulations. It is no
answer to say that France and Germany have shown even less regard for the
pledge they took at Berlin. An individual does not condone the fact that
he has broken his word by pointing out that his neighbour has done the
same.
II
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONGO STATE
Having received his mandate from the civilized world King Leopold
proceeded to organize the Government of the new State, which was in theory
to be independent of Belgium, although ruled by the same individual. In
Europe, King Leopold was a constitutional monarch; in Africa, an absolute
autocrat. There were chosen three ministers for the new State--for foreign
affairs, for finances and for internal affairs; but it cannot be too
clearly understood that they and their successors, up to 1908, were
nominated by the King, paid by the King, answerable only to the King, and,
in all ways, simply so many upper clerks in his employ. The workings of
one policy and of one brain, as capable as it is sinister, are to be
traced in every fresh development. If the ministers were ever meant to be
a screen, it is a screen which is absolutely transparent. The origin of
everything is the King--always the King. M. van Ectvelde, one of the three
head agents, put the matter into a single sentence: "C'est a votre majeste
qu'appartient l'Etat." They were simply stewards, who managed the estate
with a very alert and observant owner at their back.
One of the early acts was enough to make observers a little thoughtful. It
was the announcement of the right to issue laws by arbitrary decrees
without publishing them in Europe. There should be secret laws, which
could, at any instant, be altered. The _Bulletin Officiel_ announced that
"Tous les Actes du Gouvernement qu'il y a interet a rendre publics seront
inseres au _Bulletin Officiel_." Already it is clear that something was in
the wind which might shock the rather leathery conscience of a European
Concert. Meanwhile, the organization of the State went forward. A
Governor-General was elected, who should live at Boma, which was made the
capital. Under him were fifteen District Commissaries, who should govern
so many districts into which the whole country was divided. The only
portion which was at that time at all developed was the semi-civilized
Lower Congo at the mouth of the river. There lay the white population. The
upper reaches of the stream and of its great tributaries were known only
to a few devoted missionaries and enterprising explorers. Grenfell and
Bentley, of the Missions, with Von Wissman, the German, and the
ever-energetic Stanley, were the pioneers who, during the few years which
followed, opened up the great hinterland which was to be the scene of such
atrocious events.
But the work of the explorer had soon to be supplemented and extended by
the soldier. Whilst the Belgians had been entering the Congo land from the
west, the slave-dealing Arabs had penetrated from the east, passing down
the river as far as Stanley Falls. There could be no compromise between
such opposite forces, though some attempt was made to find one by electing
the Arab leader as Free State Governor. There followed a long scrambling
campaign, carried on for many years between the Arab slavers on the one
side and the Congo forces upon the other--the latter consisting largely of
cannibal tribes--men of the Stone Age, armed with the weapons of the
nineteenth century. The suppression of the slave trade is a good cause,
but the means by which it was effected, and the use of Barbarians who ate
in the evening those whom they had slain during the day, are as bad as the
evil itself. Yet there is no denying the energy and ability of the Congo
leaders, especially of Baron Dhanis. By the year 1894 the Belgian
expeditions had been pushed as far as Lake Tanganyika, the Arab
strongholds had fallen, and Dhanis was able to report to Brussels that the
campaign was at an end, and that slave-raiding was no more. The new State
could claim that they had saved a part of the natives from slavery. How
they proceeded to impose upon all of them a yoke, compared to which the
old slavery was merciful, will be shown in these pages. From the time of
the fall of the Arab power the Congo Free State was only called upon to
use military force in the case of mutinies of its own black troops, and of
occasional risings of its own tormented "citizens." Master of its own
house, it could settle down to exploit the country which it had won.
In the meantime the internal policy of the State showed a tendency to take
an unusual and sinister course. I have already expressed my opinion that
King Leopold was not guilty of conscious hypocrisy in the beginning, that
his intentions were vaguely philanthropic, and that it was only by degrees
that he sank to the depths which will be shown. This view is borne out by
some of the earlier edicts of the State. In 1886, a long pronouncement
upon native lands ended by the words: "All acts or agreements are
forbidden which tend to the expulsion of natives from the territory they
occupy, or to deprive them, directly or indirectly, of their liberty or
their means of existence." Such are the words of 1886. Before the end of
1887, an Act had been published, though not immediately put into force,
which had the exactly opposite effect. By this Act all lands which were
not actually occupied by natives were proclaimed to be the property of the
State. Consider for a moment what this meant! No land in such a country is
actually occupied by natives save the actual site of their villages, and
the scanty fields of grain or manioc which surround them. Everywhere
beyond these tiny patches extend the plains and forests which have been
the ancestral wandering places of the natives, and which contain the
rubber, the camwood, the copal, the ivory, and the skins which are the
sole objects of their commerce. At a single stroke of a pen in Brussels
everything was taken from them, not only the country, but the produce of
the country. How could they trade when the State had taken from them
everything which they had to offer? How could the foreign merchant do
business when the State had seized everything and could sell it for itself
direct in Europe? Thus, within two years of the establishment of the State
by the Treaty of Berlin, it had with one hand seized the whole patrimony
of those natives for whose "moral and material advantage" it had been so
solicitous, and with the other hand it had torn up that clause in the
treaty by which monopolies were forbidden, and equal trade rights
guaranteed to all. How blind were the Powers not to see what sort of a
creature they had made, and how short-sighted not to take urgent steps in
those early days to make it retrace its steps and find once more the path
of loyalty and justice! A firm word, a stern act at that time in the
presence of this flagrant breach of international agreement, would have
saved all Central Africa from the horror which has come upon it, would
have screened Belgium from a lasting disgrace, and would have spared
Europe a question which has already, as it seems to me, lowered the moral
standing of all the nations, and the end of which is not yet.
Having obtained possession of the land and its products, the next step was
to obtain labour by which these products could be safely garnered. The
first definite move in this direction was taken in the year 1888, when,
with that odious hypocrisy which has been the last touch in so many of
these transactions, an Act was produced which was described in the
_Bulletin Officiel_ as being for the "Special protection of the black." It
is evident that the real protection of the black in matters of trade was
to offer him such pay as would induce him to do a day's work, and to let
him choose his own employment, as is done with the Kaffirs of South
Africa, or any other native population. This Act had a very different end.
It allowed blacks to be bound over in terms of seven years' service to
their masters in a manner which was in truth indistinguishable from
slavery. As the negotiations were usually carried on with the capita, or
headman, the unfortunate servant was transferred with small profit to
himself, and little knowledge of the conditions of his servitude. Under
the same system the State also enlisted its employees, including the
recruits for its small army. This army was supplemented by a wild militia,
consisting of various barbarous tribes, many of them cannibals, and all of
them capable of any excess of cruelty or outrage. A German, August
Boshart, in his "Zehn Jahre Afrikanischen Lebens," has given us a clear
idea of how these tribes are recruited, and of the precise meaning of the
attractive word "libere" when applied to a State servant. "Some District
Commissary," he says, "receives instructions to furnish a certain number
of men in a given time. He puts himself in communication with the chiefs,
and invites them to a palaver at his residence. These chiefs, as a rule,
already have an inkling of what is coming, and, if made wise by
experience, make a virtue of necessity and present themselves. In that
case the negotiations run their course easily enough; each chief promises
to supply a certain number of slaves, and receives presents in return. It
may happen, however, that one or another pays no heed to the friendly
invitation, in which case war is declared, his villages are burned down,
perhaps some of his people are shot, and his stores or gardens are
plundered. In this way the wild king is soon tamed, and he sues for peace,
which, of course, is granted on condition of his supplying double the
number of slaves. These men are entered in the State books as 'liberes.'
To prevent their running away, they are put in irons and sent, on the
first opportunity, to one of the military camps, where their irons are
taken off and they are drafted into the army. The District Commissary is
paid L2 sterling for every serviceable recruit."
Having taken the country and secured labour for exploiting it in the way
described, King Leopold proceeded to take further steps for its
development, all of them exceedingly well devised for the object in view.
The great impediment to the navigation of the Congo had lain in the
continuous rapids which made the river impassable from Stanley Pool for
three hundred miles down to Boma at the mouth. A company was now formed to
find the capital by which a railway should be built between these two
points. The construction was begun in 1888, and was completed in 1898,
after many financial vicissitudes, forming a work which deserves high
credit as a piece of ingenious engineering and of sustained energy. Other
commercial companies, of which more will be said hereafter, were formed in
order to exploit large districts of the country which the State was not
yet strong enough to handle. By this arrangement the companies found the
capital for exploring, station building, etc., while the State--that is,
the King--retained a certain portion, usually half, of the company's
shares. The plan itself is not necessarily a vicious one; indeed, it
closely resembles that under which the Chartered Company of Rhodesia
grants mining and other leases. The scandal arose from the methods by
which these companies proceeded to carry out their ends--those methods
being the same as were used by the State, on whose pattern these smaller
organizations were moulded.
In the meantime King Leopold, feeling the weakness of his personal
position in face of the great enterprise which lay before him in Africa,
endeavoured more and more to draw Belgium, as a State, into the matter.
Already the Congo State was largely the outcome of Belgian work and of
Belgian money, but, theoretically, there was no connection between the two
countries. Now the Belgian Parliament was won over to advancing ten
million francs for the use of the Congo, and thus a direct connection
sprang up which has eventually led to annexation. At the time of this loan
King Leopold let it be known that he had left the Congo Free State in his
will to Belgium. In this document appear the words, "A young and spacious
State, directed from Brussels, has pacifically appeared in the sunlight,
thanks to the benevolent support of the Powers that have welcomed its
appearance. Some Belgians administer it, while others, each day more
numerous, there increase their wealth." So he flashed the gold before the
eyes of his European subjects. Verily, if King Leopold deceived other
Powers, he reserved the most dangerous of all his deceits for his own
country. The day on which they turned from their own honest, healthy
development to follow the Congo lure, and to administer without any
previous colonial experience a country more than sixty times their own
size, will prove to have been a dark day in Belgian history.
The Berlin Conference of 1885 marks the first International session upon
the affairs of the Congo. The second was the Brussels Conference of
1889-90. It is amazing to find that after these years of experience the
Powers were still ready to accept King Leopold's professions at their face
value. It is true that none of the more sinister developments had been
conspicuous, but the legislation of the State with regard to labour and
trade was already such as to suggest the turn which affairs would take in
future if not curbed by a strong hand. One Power, and one only, Holland,
had the sagacity to appreciate the true situation, and the independence to
show its dissatisfaction. The outcome of the sittings was various
philanthropic resolutions intended to strengthen the new State in dealing
with that slave trade it was destined to re-introduce in its most odious
form. We are too near to these events, and they are too painfully
intimate, to permit us to see humour in them; but the historian of the
future, when he reads that the object of the European Concert was "to
protect effectually the aboriginal inhabitants of Africa," may find it
difficult to suppress a smile. This was the last European assembly to deal
with the affairs of the Congo. May the next be for the purpose of taking
steps to truly carry out those high ends which have been forever spoken of
and never reduced to practice.
The most important practical outcome of the Brussels Conference was that
the Powers united to free the new State from those free port promises
which it had made in 1885, and to permit it in future to levy ten per
cent. upon imports. The Act was hung up for two years owing to the
opposition of Holland, but the fact of its adoption by the other Powers,
and the renewed mandate given to King Leopold, strengthened the position
of the new State to such an extent that it found no difficulty in securing
a further loan from Belgium of twenty-five millions of francs, upon
condition that, after ten years, Belgium should have the option of taking
over the Congo lands as a colony.
If in the years which immediately succeeded the Brussels Conference--from
1890 to 1894--a bird's-eye view could be taken of the enormous river
which, with its tributaries, forms a great twisted fan radiating over the
whole centre of Africa, one would mark in all directions symptoms of
European activity. At the Lower Congo one would see crowds of natives,
impressed for the service and guarded by black soldiers, working at the
railway. At Boma and at Leopoldsville, the two termini of the projected
line, cities are rising, with stations, wharves and public buildings. In
the extreme southeast one would see an expedition under Stairs exploring
and annexing the great district of Katanga, which abuts upon Northern
Rhodesia. In the furthest northeast and along the whole eastern border,
small military expeditions would be disclosed, fighting against rebellious
blacks or Arab raiders. Then, along all the lines of the rivers, posts
were being formed and stations established--some by the State and some by
the various concessionnaire companies for the development of their
commerce.
In the meantime, the State was tightening its grip upon the land with its
products, and was working up the system which was destined to produce such
grim results in the near future. The independent traders were discouraged
and stamped out, Belgium, as well as Dutch, English and French. Some of
the loudest protests against the new order may be taken from Belgian
sources. Everywhere, in flagrant disregard of the Treaty of Berlin, the
State proclaimed itself to be the sole landlord and the sole trader. In
some cases it worked its own so-called property, in other cases it leased
it. Even those who had striven to help King Leopold in the earlier stages
of his enterprise were thrown overboard. Major Parminter, himself engaged
in trade upon the Congo, sums up the situation in 1902 as follows: "To sum
up, the application of the new decrees of the Government signifies this:
that the State considers as its private property the whole of the Congo
Basin, excepting the sites of the natives' villages and gardens. It
decrees that all the products of this immense region are its private
property, and it monopolizes the trade in them. As regards the primitive
proprietors, the native tribes, they are dispossessed by a simple
circular; permission is graciously granted to them to collect such
products, but only on condition that they bring them for sale to the State
for whatever the latter may be pleased to give them. As regards alien
traders, they are prohibited in all this territory from trading with the
natives."
Everywhere there were stern orders--to the natives on the one hand, that
they had no right to gather the products of their own forests; to
independent traders on the other hand, that they were liable to punishment
if they bought anything from the natives. In January, 1892, District
Commissary Baert wrote: "The native of the district of Ubangi-Welle are
not authorized to gather rubber. It has been notified to them that they
can only receive permission to do so on condition that they gather the
produce for the exclusive benefit of the State." Captain Le Marinel, a
little later, is even more explicit: "I have decided," he says, "to
enforce rigorously the rights of the State over its domain, and, in
consequence, cannot allow the natives to convert to their own profit, or
to sell to others, any part of the rubber or ivory forming the fruits of
the domain. Traders who purchase, or attempt to purchase, such fruits of
this domain from the natives--which fruits the State only authorizes the
natives to gather subject to the condition that they are brought to
it--render themselves, in my opinion, guilty of receiving stolen goods,
and I shall denounce them to the judicial authorities, so that proceedings
may be taken against them." This last edict was in the Bangala district,
but it was followed at once by another from the more settled Equateur
district, which shows that the strict adoption of the system was
universal. In May, 1892, Lieutenant Lemaire proclaims: "Considering that
no concession has been granted to gather rubber in the domains of the
State within this district, (1) natives can only gather rubber on
condition of selling the same to the State; (2) any person or persons or
vessels having in his or their possession, or on board, more than one
kilogramme of rubber will have a _procesverbal_ drawn up against him, or
them, or it; and the ship can be confiscated without prejudice to any
subsequent proceedings."
The sight of these insignificant lieutenants and captains, who are often
non-commissioned officers of the Belgian army, issuing proclamations which
were in distinct contradiction to the expressed will of all the great
Powers of the world, might at the time have seemed ludicrous; but the
history of the next seventeen years was to prove that a small malignant
force, driven on by greed, may prove to be more powerful than a vague
general philanthropy, strong only in good intentions and platitudes.
During these years--from 1890 to 1895--whatever indignation might be felt
among traders over the restrictions placed upon them, the only news
received by the general public from the Congo Free State concerned the
founding of new stations, and the idea prevailed that King Leopold's
enterprise was indeed working out upon the humanitarian lines which had
been originally planned. Then, for the first time, incidents occurred
which gave some glimpse of the violence and anarchy which really
prevailed.
The first of these, so far as Great Britain is concerned, lay in the
treatment of natives from Sierra Leone, Lagos, and other British
Settlements, who had been engaged by the Belgians to come to Congoland and
help in railway construction and other work. Coming from the settled order
of such a colony as Sierra Leone or Lagos, these natives complained loudly
when they found themselves working side by side with impressed Congolese,
and under the discipline of the armed sentinels of the Force Publique.
They were discontented and the discontent was met by corporal punishment.
The matter grew to the dimensions of a scandal.
In answer to a question asked in the House of Commons on March 12th, 1896,
Mr. Chamberlain, as Secretary of State for the Colonies, stated that
complaints had been received of these British subjects having been
employed without their consent as soldiers, and of their having been
cruelly flogged, and, in some cases, shot; and he added: "They were
engaged with the knowledge of Her Majesty's representatives, and every
possible precaution was taken in their interests; but, in consequence of
the complaints received, the recruitment of labourers for the Congo has
been prohibited."
This refusal of the recruitment of labourers by Great Britain was the
first public and national sign of disapproval of Congolese methods. A few
years later, a more pointed one was given, when the Italian War Ministry
refused to allow their officers to serve with the Congo forces.
Early in 1895 occurred the Stokes affair, which moved public opinion
deeply, both in this country and in Germany. Charles Henry Stokes was an
Englishman by birth, but he resided in German East Africa, was the
recipient of a German Decoration for his services on behalf of German
colonization, and formed his trading caravans from a German base, with
East African natives as his porters. He had led such a caravan over the
Congo State border, when he was arrested by Captain Lothaire, an officer
in command of some Congolese troops. The unfortunate Stokes may well have
thought himself safe as the subject of one great Power and the agent of
another, but he was tried instantly in a most informal manner upon a
charge of selling guns to the natives, was condemned, and was hanged on
the following morning. When Captain Lothaire reported his proceedings to
his superiors they signified their approbation by promoting him to the
high rank of Commissaire-General.