“Some of the lies sent forth on the wings of the Press are hereby nailed to the counter, and it is to be hoped that yourself, or your Society, will at once disprove, by any means at your disposal, charges which, if not so disproved, clearly show that your evidence in connection with these matters is discredited and untrustworthy, and that no one will be justified in paying attention to any statement of yours, unless supported by evidence that has not been purchased or invented.
“The Editor,
“The Catholic Herald.”
[45] From The Transvaal Trouble, an Extract from the Biography of the late Sir Bartle Frere, by John Martineau (pp. 211, 212):
“During these years, about 1879, a society in London, called the Aborigines’ Protection Society, took upon itself the function of judging between the white and the black races in South Africa, and of arraigning the conduct of the white race whenever there was a question between the two. That a society in London, with paid officers bound to justify their employment by finding something to complain of, should take upon itself to pronounce judgment upon difficult and complex questions between races in South Africa was, on the face of it, not more reasonable than that a society should be started at Cape Town, say, to protect women and children in London. By its constitution, which was practically that of advocatus diaboli against the white man, such a society must always of necessity take a one-sided view, from which misapprehension and mischief could hardly fail to result, however carefully considered were the methods employed.
“The methods employed by the Aborigines’ Protection Society bore some resemblance to those of mediæval Venice. The Blue-books of the time are full of letters from the society to the Secretary of State, detailing stories of alleged oppression or cruelty, and demanding an inquiry; or sometimes a question was asked to the same effect in Parliament. It would be many months before the reply to the inquiry could come back from the Cape, and, in the meantime, the story was circulated, and the refutation came too late to be listened to. The society generally refused to give the name of its informant, or the particulars of time and place, so that, like the lion’s mouth at Venice, it offered an opportunity to any one—agitator, place-hunter, or criminal having a spite against a magistrate or official—to injure him anonymously.... The fear of being denounced by some scoundrel to the society in some districts seriously interfered with and often perverted the administration of justice.... In one instance, a man, on whose testimony is placed special reliance, was discovered to be a disfrocked clergyman who had been in custody for swindling another informant, who in turn was a trader who had been in jail for gun-running.
“Mr. H. Nixon, writing to Sir Bartle Frere, says:
“‘The lawlessness of the coloured races and their hopeless state of degradation, their drunkenness, and general dissolute habits may fairly be laid to the baneful influence of the Aborigines’ Protection Society, which has done everything it possibly could to paralyse the arm of the law in the execution of justice, and I consider the demoralisation of the natives is entirely due to their persistent agitation. The drunkenness in this province is quite alarming and unprecedented.’”
CHAPTER XXXI
THE CONGO CAMPAIGN IN AMERICA
The interest taken by Americans in the affairs of the Congo Free State has never been very keen. What little of interest, however, we do take in that distant region has been sentimental, for the greater part based upon the national respect for Stanley and his work. The campaign in England against the Congo, therefore, fails to evoke any substantial sympathy on this side of the Atlantic. Citizens of the United States are better employed than in undertaking knight-errantry at the behest of certain disappointed British merchants and fanatics.