The story of the Congo Free State

by Henry Wellington Wack

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Wheaton’s International Law.

[2] L’État Indépendant du Congo, M. Wauters, p. 27.

[3] See Compilation of Reports of Committee on Foreign Relations. United States Senate. Recognition of Congo Free State. March 26, 1884, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1902. Vol. vi., p. 221. The appendices include, among other documents, the notes of Sir Travers Twiss and Mr. Arntz.

[4] Protocoles et Acte Général de la Conférence de Berlin (1884-85), p. 23 ss.

[5] F. Cattier, Droit et Administration de l’État Indépendant du Congo, 1898, p. 17.

[6] For a full report of the Committee on Foreign Relations to the Senate of the United States, March 26, 1884, together with the Treaties of Vivi, Leopoldville, Manyanga, and Stephanieville, see Appendix.

CHAPTER VII
HORRORS OF THE ARAB SLAVE TRADE

Slavery Defined.

Slavery: the absolute, irresponsible ownership of one class of human beings by another class; a contract in which the only factors are might on the one side and helplessness on the other; servitude exacted by force.

Slavery has existed in all countries from the earliest recorded periods. The most enlightened philosophers of ancient Greece and Rome were unable to conceive a community of which a section was not enslaved by the rest.

As a system, slavery, by its long-continued, universal practice, and the simple solution it affords of what in our modern world is referred to as the labour difficulty, appeals to two powerful human instincts: conservatism and cupidity. The ethical unfairness of one man’s being made wholly subservient to the will of another; forced to labour for him without reward; his chattel to retain, sell, or slay, as though he were a horse or a dog, was perceived from the earliest times. But those most interested in the overthrow of the system, the slaves themselves, being ignorant, and purposely kept in that condition by their taskmasters, suffered on, century after century, finding no champion for their cause until the advent of the Redeemer of Mankind, preaching universal brotherhood and equal rights for all men.

But the greater the wrong the longer it takes to right it, and Christ’s words were but the seed from which has sprung our great harvest of freedom. It has been a harvest of slow growth. For ages after the divine words were spoken on behalf of the slave by the first and greatest of his advocates, slavery was still regarded by many nations as indispensable to their existence. Indeed, eighteen centuries elapsed before there was any appreciable awakening to the deep infamy of slavery. It occurred in England, and was the result of the unwearied efforts of a small band of enthusiasts, whose labours, like those of all reformers, were at first derided.

England, though free from the curse of slavery within her own proper borders, had in the course of history done as much as, nay, more than, any other nation to enslave the Negro. She had acquired him in Africa by thousands in exchange for guns, knives, alcohol, and dry goods; had transported him across the Atlantic to her American cotton plantations in a manner compared with which a modern steerage emigrant’s experience may be regarded as a luxurious cruise; and had then extracted the utmost amount of work from him by the aid of the lash.

Types of Bearers (North Bank of Cataracts).

Group of Yie-Yie Women (Uelle).

England’s Retribution.

All the vested interests created by this traffic, long persevered in, as well as the callousness engendered by its brutality, had to be fought against and overthrown by a small band of Liberationists, aided by nothing but their enthusiasm and a just cause. Nevertheless they daily gathered strength, and finally succeeded in inducing the British Parliament to vote a hundred million dollars for the purchase and liberation of every slave in every country where the British flag flies. This grand event took place in the year·1830.

The Fight for Right and Union.

Three decades later came that tremendous convulsion in the United States, the like of which the world has not seen. It was resolved by the United States Government to free the slaves, slavery being a system never deliberately adopted by the United States, but inherited, as it were, from the English Colonial régime, of which they had by revolution become the successors. The slaveholding Southern States, resisting the new law, sought to withdraw from the Union, and civil war ensued, in which the Abolitionists were entirely successful, but at an appalling cost in men and money.

A Common Error.

It has been necessary to refer thus briefly to the history of slavery because of the strangely prevalent opinion that when peace was restored within the United States, and slavery finally abolished there, slavery no longer existed in the world. True, it was known that there was a sort of domestic service, chiefly of women, akin to slavery, practised in China, Persia, and some minor Oriental countries; but that was thought to be all. It came, therefore, as a rude shock to civilised humanity when travellers of unquestionable veracity, such as Dr. Livingstone, Sir Samuel Baker, and Henry M. Stanley, demonstrated that the slave trade not only still existed throughout vast regions in Africa, but was rampant there in its most atrocious aspect. At first it was hardly realised that the labours of Granville Sharpe, Clarkson, and Wilberforce, the monetary sacrifices of England, and the devastating war in America had, taken together, fallen so far short of complete triumph. But the evidence was overwhelming that such was indeed the case, the Soudan, the Upper Nile, and the basins of the Congo and the great lakes—more than a third of all Africa, exceeding in area the whole of Europe—being still the field of the iniquity. The Sultans of petty states in the Soudan were shown to be, for the most part, chiefs of ferocious Arab tribes who thrived by raiding Central African villages and carrying off their inhabitants, whom they sold for slaves. The cruelties attending their marauding operations were too great to admit of exaggeration. “All over Africa,” wrote Schweinfurth, a German traveller, “dried human skeletons show where the slave-trader has passed.”

A Picture in Words.

Acting under heavy pressure brought to bear upon it by the anti-slavery humanitarians in England the British Government coerced the Khedive of Egypt into signing a convention having for its object the suppression of slavery within his dominions. In order to carry out the engagement into which he had entered, the Khedive appointed General Gordon Governor of the Soudan, and that remarkable man, during the six years that he held that office, displayed so much energy and skill that he succeeded in utterly eradicating the evil throughout the entire region placed under his control. Nevertheless, the general result was not so good as had been hoped for; the slave-traders, despoiled of their hunting-grounds in the Egyptian Soudan, pursuing their nefarious occupation with redoubled vigour on Lake Tanganyika and the Upper Congo. With what extremity of horror they conducted their operations has been so graphically described by a Belgian merchant, M. Hodister, that we make no apology for quoting his account in full.

It is four o’clock in the morning [says M. Hodister]. A great calm prevails, only the soft and melancholy cry of the African owl is to be heard. The village sentinels are either withdrawn, or squatting low, asleep; the houses are closed; every one sleeps; all is repose; the sense of security is absolute. Suddenly the sound of a gun, then cries of terror are raised, breaking the great silence, followed by a fusillade, which seems to come from all sides, piercing the straw walls. The boatmen have fired, leaving their canoes to their women; they have rushed forward, attacking the village in front, while the others are assailing it from the rear. The inhabitants, suddenly roused from their sleep, rush terrified from their houses. They are panic-stricken, and forget wives, children, everything. Their one thought is of flight—to conceal themselves in the wood. The panic is at its height; rifle shots, horrible cries, resound, mixing with the shrieks of fear from the women and children. Then follow the stifled noise of a struggle at close quarters, of falling bodies, a suppressed groan, sharp cries of agony. The ground shakes under the tread of the combatants and fugitives. Soon afterwards appears a star in the blackness of the night, and a dry, crackling sound is heard. It is a detached hut fired by the enemy to light them in their work without the risk of burning the whole village. Before doing that, they wish to pillage it. Meanwhile, a few of the inhabitants have seized their weapons and attempt some resistance; but in a little time this is overcome by superior numbers. To the noise of the fight succeed the cries of the prisoners, of the wounded and the dying. The horizon lightens; the sun has risen suddenly and illumined this field of carnage and desolation. Then the Arabs kill the wounded, bind their prisoners, and begin to plunder the village. Every house is visited and despoiled of its contents. Where in the evening there had been a pretty village, surrounded by a plantation like a covering of verdure, a gay and happy population, there is now a great black, empty spot; for on the completion of the sack the village had been set on fire and burned to the ground. Men, women, and children, tied together promiscuously, corpses strewing the ground, blood puddles emitting an acrid smell, and the assassins, horrible in their war paint, which during the struggle has run with their sweat and blood, complete the picture.

Bound together in groups by stout cords around their waists and necks, the wretched procession of captives, often two or three thousand in number, was, after an incident such as this, marched to the coast. Generally, at least a third of them died by the way. The sick and the lamed, unable to maintain the desired pace, were weeded out at each halting-place and ruthlessly butchered by their captors.

A Herculean Task.

It will require no very inventive imagination to appreciate the magnitude of the difficulties confronting the Belgian pioneers in their effort to suppress slavery, carried on with such ferocious brutality over an area so vast as Central Africa. Yet that was but one of several tasks enjoined upon them by their King; but it was first in order and importance, and until it was accomplished little or no progress in other respects could be hoped for. “Crime is not punished as an offence against God, but as prejudicial to society,” says the historian Froude. King Leopold saw in the crime of slavery both the offence to God and the prejudice to man, and was prepared to exert his utmost energy and, if necessary, expend the last franc of his private fortune, to stamp out the evil. In this heroic endeavour his Majesty was ably seconded by his minister, the distinguished Baron Lambermont, who has recorded his opinion of slavery in these words: “The slave trade is the very denial of every law, of all social order. Man-hunting constitutes a crime of high treason against humanity. It ought to be repressed wherever it can be reached, on land as well as by sea.”

Native Potters at Work (Aruwimi).

It is not claimed that there is anything original in the sentiment that animates this well-expressed sentence. Similar views to those of Baron Lambermont have been held by all great thinkers since the establishment of the Christian religion; but it is referred to in this place as an additional proof, if any were needed, of the high moral purpose underlying the enterprise of the King of the Belgians, and to show how that moral purpose was sympathised with and shared by his Majesty’s ministers and the Belgian people.

That every religious sect without exception has denounced slavery as the blackest spot sullying the fair fame of the nineteenth century need not be reiterated. In logical sequence, every religious sect was prepared to assist, morally and materially, in the removal of a disgrace which was felt to reflect upon every civilised community. In an encyclical, dated 5th of May, 1888, addressed by Pope Leo XIII. to the bishops of Brazil, congratulating them upon the abolition of slavery in their country, his Holiness referred to the deplorable condition of the Negro in Central Africa, and called upon “all who wield power, those who sway empires, those who desire that the rights of nature and humanity be respected, and those who desire the progress of religion, to unite everywhere to secure the abolition of this most shameful and criminal traffic.”

Pope Leo XIII. on Slavery.

This noble appeal touched the hearts of thousands in every nation of Europe and in America. For Cardinal Lavigerie, the Belgian prelate, who had so long laboured on behalf of the oppressed Congolese, it had a special significance, inspiring him with renewed courage and energy in his glorious work. When, for the first time in history, a small band of Christian Negroes from Central Africa was received in audience by the Pope, a few days after the issue of this encyclical, Leo XIII., replying to the address of Cardinal Lavigerie, who had presented them, said:

Since We have been Pope, Our regards have turned towards that disinherited land, Central Africa. Our heart has been touched at the thought of the enormous amount of physical and moral misery that exists there. We have repeatedly urged all those who have power in their hands to put a stop to the hideous traffic called the slave trade, and to use all and every means to secure that end. And, inasmuch as the African continent is the principal scene of this traffic and, as it were, the house of slavery, We recommend all missionaries who there preach the Holy Gospel to devote their whole efforts, their whole life, to this sublime work of redemption. But it is upon you, Cardinal, that We count especially for success.

Cardinal Lavigerie’s practical reply to this direct personal appeal from the head of his Church was the formation in Belgium of the Anti-Slavery Society. The agitation on behalf of the Negro was not confined to Catholics. Among the friends of the movement were to be found the best of every creed as of every nation. Great conventions were held in Germany and England having for their object the suppression of slavery in Central Africa, and societies formed in those countries; and France, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, and Portugal quickly followed suit. Though “man’s inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn,” it was now shown to be also potent to arouse some of the best instincts of human nature to assure its suppression. At last the horrors of the African slave trade were adequately realised, and the world applauded Leopold, King of the Belgians, for his arduous labours for its extinction, and was anxious to strengthen his hands for grappling with the still formidable work that remained to do.

CHAPTER VIII
THE BERLIN CONFERENCE

A clear view of the position of the State previous to the adoption of the resolutions known as the General Act of the Berlin Conference may be had from a summary of the signal events which had marked its formative period.

The General Act of Berlin.

The Congo Free State was born of the Congo International Association founded by his Majesty, Leopold II. in 1883, while Stanley was in his service. Prior to the legal foundation of the State, the Association had obtained recognition of its sovereignty as hereinbefore indicated. By treaties concluded in 1884 and 1885 with the United States and with many of the European Powers, it adhered, on the 25th of February, 1885, to the resolutions of the Berlin Conference, which, embodied in a General Act, established, amongst other things, freedom of trade throughout the Congo Basin, and declared free navigation on the Congo River, its tributaries, and the lakes and canals connected therewith. The text of the General Act of Berlin, so far as it relates to the Congo, is fully set forth in an appendix. The principal subjects contained in the Act which may concern the reader are briefly stated:

Making Manioc Flour, Basoko (Aruwimi).

1. A Declaration relative to freedom of trade in the Basin of the Congo, its embouchures and circumjacent regions, with other provisions connected therewith.

2. A Declaration relative to the Slave Trade, and the operations by sea or land which furnish slaves to that trade.

3. A Declaration relative to the neutrality of the territories comprised in the Conventional Basin of the Congo.

4. An Act of Navigation for the Congo, which, while having regard to local circumstances, extends to this river, its affluents, and the waters in its system (eaux qui leur sont assimilées), the general principles enunciated in Articles CVIII. and CXVI. of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna, and intended to regulate, as between the Signatory Powers of that Act, the free navigation of the waterways separating or traversing several States—these said principles having since then been applied by agreement to certain rivers of Europe and America, but especially to the Danube, with the modifications stipulated by the Treaties of Paris (1856), of Berlin (1878), and of London (of 1871 and 1883).

5. An Act of Navigation for the Niger, which, while likewise having regard to local circumstances, extends to this river and its affluents the same principles as set forth in Articles CVIII. and CXVI. of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna.

6. A Declaration introducing into international relations certain uniform rules with reference to future occupations on the coasts of the African Continent.

The treaties which, before the adoption of these resolutions on February 26, 1885, the Congo Free State had concluded with various Powers, were those with the United States of America, dated April 22, 1886; Germany, 8th November; Great Britain, 16th December; Italy, 19th December; Spain, 7th January, 1885; France, 5th February; Russia on the same day; Sweden and Norway, 10th February; Portugal, 14th February; Denmark and Belgium, 23rd February. These treaties[7] were notified to the Conference on the 23rd February, and the neutrality of the State was declared and published on the 1st August in the same year.

Praise from Bismarck.

At the close of the Berlin Conference on 26th February, 1885, Prince Bismarck offered his tribute of appreciation for the work which, deriving its inspiration from the King of the Belgians, had, by the Powers represented, been formulated into an economic code for the guidance of the four nations, which, besides the Congo Free State, occupied the great Congo Basin. Prince Bismarck’s address has the effect of oracular utterance in the light of events since the day when he wisely said that the work of the Conference would be, like every human undertaking, susceptible of improvement. The following is the full text of Prince Bismarck’s closing speech:

Gentlemen:—Our Conference, after long and laborious deliberations, has reached the end of its work, and I am happy to state that, thanks to your efforts, and to the spirit of conciliation which has presided at our negotiations, a complete agreement has been established on all the points of the programme which was submitted to us.

The resolutions which we are on the point of sanctioning assure to the commerce of all nations free access to the centre of the African Continent. The guarantees with which commercial liberty in the Basin of the Congo will be surrounded, and all the arrangements made in the Acts of Navigation for the Congo and the Niger, are of a nature to offer to the commerce and the industry of all nations the most favourable conditions for their development and security.

By another series of provisions you have shown your solicitude for the moral and material well-being of the native populations, and there is room to hope that those principles, dictated by a spirit of practical wisdom, will bear fruit and will contribute to bestow on those populations the benefits of civilisation.

The practical conditions under which are placed the vast regions that you have just opened to commercial enterprise have seemed to exact special guarantees for the maintenance of peace and public order. As a matter of fact, the evils of war would assume a particularly disastrous character if the natives were led to take part in the conflicts of civilised Powers. Justly preoccupied with the dangers that such an eventuality would entail in the interests of commerce and of civilisation, you have sought the means of withdrawing a great part of the African Continent from the vicissitudes of general politics, by restraining these national rivalries to the pacific competition of commerce and industry.

In the same category you have aimed at preventing the misunderstanding and contests to which new seizures of territory on the coasts of Africa might give rise. The declaration as to the formalities to be complied with in order to make acquisitions of territory effective has introduced into public right a new regulation, which will contribute in its degree to remove from international relations causes of dissension and conflict.

The spirit of mutual good understanding which has distinguished your deliberations has equally presided over the negotiations which have taken place outside the Conference, with the object of regulating difficult questions of delimitation between the parties which exercise sovereign rights in the basin of the Congo, and which by the nature of their position are called upon to become the chief guardians of the work which we are about to sanction.

I cannot touch on this subject without rendering my homage to the noble efforts of His Majesty the King of the Belgians, the founder of a work which is to-day recognised by almost all the Powers, and which by its consolidation may render precious services to the cause of humanity.

Gentlemen, I am charged by His Majesty the Emperor and King, my august master, to express to you his warmest thanks for the part that each of you has taken in the happy accomplishment of the task of the Conference.

I fulfil a final duty in making myself the mouthpiece of the gratitude that the Conference owes those of its members who have discharged the difficult labours of the Commission, notably the Baron de Courcel and the Baron Lambermont. I also thank the delegates for the valuable assistance they have afforded us, and I associate with the expression of that gratitude the Secretaries of the Conference, who by the precision of their work have facilitated our task.

Gentlemen, the work of the Conference will be, like every human undertaking, susceptible of improvement and perfection; but it will mark, I hope, a step forward in the development of international relations, and will form a new link of solidarity between civilised nations.

Sir Charles Dilke Astray.

The brilliant, cordial, and edifying final session of the Berlin Conference presaged no such campaign of calumny as that which has proceeded since Sir Charles Dilke, on gross misinformation purveyed by interested persons, and on what appears to have been his wilful misreading of a book entitled The Fall of the Congo Arabs, attacked the Congo State by moving in the British Parliament on April 2, 1897, a measure calling for a new Conference to consider charges which no one had presented, but which, for some inscrutable reason, this eminent parliamentarian seemed anxious to dignify by sensational legislation.

When the Berlin Conference concluded its labours, it was with manifest sympathy for the King of the Belgians and his voluntary pledge to an African task which practically all the participating Powers regarded as impossible of achievement, such were its glaring difficulties. Now, after twenty years of Belgian sacrifice, there are those who, jealous of the achievements in a task they were so anxious to avoid in 1885, must destroy where they cannot reap in 1905. To men of purpose and brave outlook, this is merely one of the many incivilities of civilisation. Success begets envy in one’s neighbour; failure often confirms him in his secret contempt.

In Belgium the completion of the General Act of the Berlin Conference evoked a patriotic feeling of satisfaction which, in its address to the King, the Chamber of Representatives voiced in the following language: “To your Majesty belongs the honour of having conceived the African work, of having pursued and developed it by persevering efforts.... We felicitate your Majesty on these important results, and, as Belgians, we are proud of the solemn homage rendered by the Powers to the generous and progressive ideas of our Sovereign.” The Belgian nation, for a long time uncertain of the result of the philanthropic work of its King in Central Africa, and having observed that other nations had shrunk from this costly task of civilisation, now uttered its sentiments of approval in many forms. In his speech before the Chamber on March 10, 1885, M. Beernaert, then Minister of Finance, said, amongst other expressions of hope for the new State, that the merit of the work accomplished “belongs especially to the initiation, to the persistent energy, and to the sacrifices of our King.” Then, expressing the hope of extended industries—a hope that was largely, if not entirely, the incentive which actuated the Powers Signatory to the Berlin Act—the Minister concluded his address with the belief that the Congo would offer “to our superabundant activity, to our industries more and more confined, outlets by which we shall know how to profit. May the enterprising spirit of our King encourage our countrymen to seek, even at a distance, new sources of greatness and prosperity for our dear country.” The Belgian Chamber and Senate ratified the nation’s participation in the General Act of the Berlin Conference without a dissentient voice.

To the loyal address of his Parliament, the King of the Belgians made reply, graciously acknowledging the support his subjects had given him in his great African work.

Native Musicians at Lusambo (Lualaba-Kassai).

There remained now the making of a Sovereign for the new State, and, having regard to the universal tribute of praise rendered to its founder at the Berlin Conference, it was clear enough, in its opinion, who should continue to direct the destinies of a wild territory in which so much had been accomplished in so short a time. Belgium, however, was not prepared, in 1885, to take over the Congo State as her colony. There were, at that time, many considerations in Belgium and in the Congo to suggest caution to a naturally conservative Government. The creation of the Congo State had involved many risks and great difficulties. It had required a huge expenditure of money, nearly all of which the King had personally contributed without the slightest assurance that his country or his estate would ever recover it, except in so far as his marvellous foresight assured him in this respect. If there were many difficulties at the beginning of his Majesty’s African enterprise, there were still greater obstacles to be surmounted. To the ultra-conservative section of the Belgian Parliament the whole project was still enshrouded in doubt. But the King, having so far borne the risks and the cost of civilising the savage African black man, had also given his country the written assurance that the result of his labours—whatever they were when realised—should be at the disposal, by appropriation or otherwise, of the Belgian nation “without costing her anything.” As the theory of a purely personal union between Belgium and the Congo State had found much favour, it was proposed that the King of the Belgians should be empowered to become the Sovereign of the Congo Free State without in any respect involving the Belgian nation.

In this eminently practical proposal the King had taken the initiative in the following letter to his Council of Ministers:

Gentlemen:—The work created in Africa by the International African Association has greatly developed. A new State has been founded, its limits are fixed, and its flag is recognised by almost all the Powers.

There remains to organise a Government and an Administration on the banks of the Congo.

The plenipotentiaries of the nations represented at the Berlin Conference have shown themselves favourable to the work undertaken, and since then the two Legislative Chambers, the principal towns of the country, and a great number of important bodies and associations have expressed to me on this subject the most sympathetic sentiments.

With such encouragement I could not recoil from the prosecution and achievement of a task in which I had, as a matter of fact, taken an important part; and since, gentlemen, you consider, as I do, that it may be useful to the country, I beg of you to demand from the Legislative Chambers the assent which is necessary to me.

The terms of Article 62 of the Constitution describe by themselves the situation which has to be established.

King of the Belgians, I should at the same time be the Sovereign of another State.

That State would be independent, like Belgium, and it would enjoy, like her, the benefits of neutrality.

It would have to provide for its own needs; and experience based on the example of the neighbouring colonies justifies me in affirming that it would dispose of the necessary resources.

For its defence and its police it would rely on African forces commanded by European volunteers.

There would then be between Belgium and the new State only a personal bond. I am convinced that this union would be advantageous for the country, without there being the possibility of imposing any burdens on it in any case.

If my hopes are realised, I shall find myself sufficiently rewarded for my efforts. The welfare of Belgium, as you know, gentlemen, is the object of my whole life.

Leopold.

There were a few obstructionists in the Belgian Parliament who, impelled by an habitual attitude of opposition to all that the dominant political party proposed, offered considerable criticism. They disregarded the similar expedients adopted by Prussia, Holland, and Great Britain in reference respectively to Neuchatel, Luxembourg, and Hanover. But the spirit of the Belgian people favoured the King’s suggestion, and his Majesty’s Ministers stood firmly by him. When the vote was called on April 28, 1885, the Chamber passed the following resolution with but one dissentient:

His Majesty, Leopold II., King of the Belgians, is authorised to be the chief of the State founded in Africa by the International Association of the Congo. The union between Belgium and the new State of the Congo shall be exclusively personal.

The Senate two days later having passed a similar resolution, the King addressed the following acknowledgment to his Ministers:

Gentlemen:—The Chambers, by voting almost unanimously the resolution that you submitted to them, have shown themselves convinced that at the same time that I was pursuing, in the general interest, the international African work, I had it at heart to serve the country, to contribute to the augmentation of its wealth, and to increase its reputation in the world. I have asked you to thank, in my name, the Chambers for the mark of high confidence which they have given me. I also beg of you to accept for yourselves the expression of my very sincere gratitude. Believe me, gentlemen, your very affectionate

Leopold.

Leopold II., King of the Belgians, had now become Sovereign of the Congo Free State, a territory with a population estimated as five times larger than the Belgium which he had ruled since 1865. Many foreign bodies, philanthropic, scientific, and commercial, sent their congratulations; the Lord Mayor of London visited the King in state, and offered him the felicitations of the British metropolis, and all the Powers concerned in the Conventional Basin of the Congo expressed their satisfaction with this happy consummation of his Majesty’s enlightened undertaking in Mid-Africa.

What, by the Berlin Conference had been sanctioned, now assumed permanent form, organisation, and well-defined onward movement. There were still difficulties ahead, some of them with the State’s neighbours, France and Portugal. Their early exactions may be regarded as symptomatic of that febrific goading which has now become the mania of lesser bodies elsewhere. Subsequent conventions with France and Portugal somewhat assured the Congo State that its onward march would not be obstructed by these Powers. On the other hand, the exalted views and edifying principles so generally prevalent at the Berlin Conference soon became stale and innocuous in the official mind of the other Powers who had subscribed to precepts which, from subsequent indifference or self-interest, were disregarded. Not the least among the pledges of the Powers of the Berlin Conference was that designed to regulate the importation of alcohol. Consistent with the Christianising aims of its Sovereign, the Congo Free State has fulfilled this pledge in a manner to put its neighbours to shame for the large percentage of revenue they derive from a debasing liquor traffic.

So if the young State started upon its progressive course in 1885-87, having paid a heavy price to France and to Portugal for freedom to develop under the government of the strong personality of its magnanimous Sovereign, it was perhaps because such a course would secure the Congo State to the Belgian nation in accordance with the preconceived purpose of its King. By the Congo-French Convention the basin of the Kwilu and the left bank of the Congo, from Stanley Pool as far north-eastward as its explorations had attained, were assigned to France. On the other hand, it insured to the Congo Free State what constitutes its outlet to the sea, the possession of the district of the Cataracts, and the towns of Boma and Banana at the mouth of the Congo. The Congo-Portuguese Convention assigned to Portugal territory south of the Congo as far as Noki, and along the parallel of Noki to its intersection by the river Kwango, which from that point was designated as the boundary in a southerly direction. The territorial assignments of these conventions were subsequently modified, and Germany and Great Britain have since acquired the large areas of the Congo Basin lying east of Lake Tanganyika and its parallel north and south.