For the present, and undoubtedly for some time to come, the chief source of income for the country must be by trade in natural products, collected in the forests. It is time, however, that serious effort should be made to develop the actual agricultural opportunities of Liberia. With a rich soil, abundant rainfall, tropical temperature, vegetation flourishes. Liberia should produce vast quantities of rice, corn, cotton, sugar, sweet potatoes, yams, bananas, plantains, ginger, coffee, cocoa, pineapples and other tropical fruits. There is no reason why in many parts of the country cattle, goats and sheep should not be raised in quantities. At present, a very large amount of foodstuffs is introduced from the outside world; fresh meat is to be had only when steamers pass; rice, even—of which the natives raise quantities—is imported. Formerly considerable coffee was exported; the coffee tree grows wild and is probably a native of the country, and Liberian coffee has a fair reputation in the foreign market; at present, very little is exported. It is curious that agriculture has never been a favorite occupation with the people. As long ago as 1826 and 1827 the famous agent of the colony, Jehudi Ashmun, complained bitterly that the people all desired to trade instead of to practice hand labor and develop agriculture. It is certain that if it is to be permanently prosperous, Liberia must encourage agricultural pursuits. It was natural enough that freed slaves should look upon manual trades and field labor as contemptible; that they should look upon barter and trade as desirable. Unfortunately, at the time of colonization it was easy for men to trade. This dislike for actual labor continues to the present day; it is possible to hire bush natives to do the absolutely necessary heavy labor very cheaply. In Liberian houses great numbers of native servants are employed. Trade and politics absorb the thought and time of the best men in the community. It is going to be a difficult task to place agriculture and hand labor upon a proper footing, but it must be done and soon.
We must not expect much more in the direction of education than we would find in our own country towns of six or seven thousand people. There are actually not many schools in the republic. The superintendent of education is a member of the Cabinet. The present incumbent is a native—a Bassa. He has general supervision of some ninety-one schools, in which number night schools and mission schools are included. The highest institution of public education is Liberia College, at Monrovia. It has done good work and most of the men of prominence in the Government to-day are graduates from it. It has, however, little more than the teaching force and equipment of a high school in one of our smaller towns. It needs strengthening in every way. New schools should be established, especially in the country among the native tribes, and special schools of agriculture and manual training are a crying need. President Howard, in his inaugural address in 1912, recognized the necessity of prompt development in education and agriculture. Besides Liberia College, there is in Monrovia the College of West Africa. This is a Methodist mission school, doing an excellent work for both Liberian and native students. There are also important Episcopal schools on the St. Paul’s River, and in the neighborhood of Cape Palmas.
The President of the republic was kind enough to give a reception in my honor. On that occasion I was asked to make a few remarks regarding Liberia. I stated that in my opinion Liberia’s greatest asset is her native population. Twelve thousand people, no matter how interested, wise and industrious, cannot possibly carry the entire burden. If Liberia is to prosper in the future, it can only be because the Liberians secure the hearty coöperation and friendly feeling of the million natives. If they can be shown that their interest and development are to be gained only through friendship to and recognition of the Government, the prosperity and success of Liberia may be secured and her independence maintained.
SHOULD THE AFRICAN MISSION BE ABANDONED.
(The Spirit of Missions. August, 1913.)
The development of the Church mission in Liberia has been most encouraging. It began in March, 1836, when James M. Thompson, a colored man, opened a mission school at Mount Vaughan with seven native children. It has grown until, in his last report, Bishop Ferguson stated that there were 26 clergymen, 8 candidates for holy orders, 2 postulants, 25 lay teachers, and 46 catechists and teachers. During the year of 1912, 242 children and 237 adults had been baptized—423 of them being converts from heathenism. During the year there were 165 confirmations. The grand total of baptisms to date was 9,565; the total of confirmations, 4,856. The number of present communicants was 2,404, of which two-thirds were natives. The estimated value of buildings belonging to the mission was $121,250; 22 day schools, 19 boarding schools and 38 Sunday schools was conducted; 1,210 day-school pupils, 643 boarding-school pupils, 2,714 Sunday-school pupils were in attendance. It is a noble record of results for faithful service.
It has been suggested in some quarters that the American Protestant Episcopal Church shall abandon this promising mission field; or rather it is proposed that it shall exchange this successful and flourishing work with English brethren, for work started by them in Central America. It is possible that from the point of view of church administration such an exchange may be desirable; it is certain that from any other point of view it will be a great misfortune. The writer of this article has himself been in Liberia, and is profoundly interested in Liberian problems. He believes that any proposal to abandon work in Liberia could only arise through ignorance of the actual conditions in the Black Republic. He has no wish to interfere in affairs which in no wise concern himself. Deeply interested, however, in the progress of the only remaining country of Africa which is administered by black men, he desires to express his reasons for opposing the suggestion.
It is now seventy-seven years since the Liberian work was begun. It has been wisely directed, it has been nobly supported, it has been successful. Surely the ultimate aim in all such labor is to produce a self-supporting church in the mission field. The Liberian Church is already approaching the point of self-support. In his last report Bishop Ferguson says: “I believe the greatest joy of my life would be to be able to say to the Board of Missions, ‘The Church in Liberia will hereafter support itself. You need not appropriate any more funds towards its maintenance.’ That I am unable to do so as yet is not because of an indisposition on the part of the people to contribute to such a worthy object, but rather because of their poverty, through not having learnt to work profitably. It must be remembered that two-thirds of our communicants are native Africans who, as well as the majority of the class we call ‘Americo-Liberians’ making up the one-third, need to be trained in some remunerative industry. The fact is, that the financial burden of the Church in the district is resting on a comparatively small number. Taking this into consideration, the amount raised from time to time for the building, repairing, and improving of churches, and to meet other parochial expenses is rather creditable than otherwise. Besides expenses at home, they contribute annually toward missions in general in the shape of Lenten and Easter offerings and the missionary apportionment fund. Our quota of the last named has already been paid up for the present year. But as above shown, comparatively few deserve the credit. To make the work self-supporting, at least a majority of the members should be able to contribute to it.”
Certainly, it is a basic error to abandon a work which has been conducted for seventy-seven years, when it approaches the point of self-support. A change subjecting the mission to a new administration, would mean setback and delay in gaining the end desired.
The American Church is bound in a special way to Liberia; the original settlers in Liberia were American freed-men; they had been our slaves. As Americans we had been responsible for the dragging of thousands of helpless black people from their homes; we had held them for years in captivity. When finally we sent them back as freed-men to the shores of their native continent, our obligations by no means ceased.