In spite of an element of Arab civilisation which the slave-trader had certainly implanted in the Congo Forest, he had made himself notorious for his ravages and cruelties. Numbers of natives had been horribly mutilated, hands and feet lopped off, and women’s breasts cut away. These people explained to me that these mutilations—which, as only a Negro could, they had survived—had been the work of the Manyema slave-trader and his gang, done sometimes out of wanton cruelty, sometimes as a punishment for thieving or absconding. May it not be that many of the mutilated people of whom we hear so much in the northern and eastern part of the Congo Free State are also the surviving results of Arab cruelty? I am aware that it is customary to attribute these outrages to the native soldiery and police employed by the Belgians to maintain order or to collect taxes; and though I am fully aware that these native soldiers and police under imperfect Belgian administration, as under imperfect British control, can commit all sorts of atrocities (as we know they did in Mashonaland and in Uganda), every bad deed of this description is not to be laid to their charge, for many outrages are the work of the Arab traders and raiders in these countries, and of their apt pupils the Manyemas. This much I can speak of with certainty and emphasis: that from the British frontier near Fort George to the limit of my journeys into the Mbuba country of the Congo Free State, up and down the Semliki, the natives appeared to be prosperous and happy under the excellent administration of the late Lieutenant Meura and his coadjutor, Mr. Karl Eriksson. The extent to which they were building their villages and cultivating their plantations within the precincts of Fort Mbeni showed that they had no fear of the Belgians, while the Dwarfs equally asserted the goodness of the local white men.

Great value attaches to the evidence of Sir Harry Johnston, it being impossible to impute to him any particular bias. He travelled independently, visiting the Congo on three occasions—1882-83, 1891-96, and 1900. In a letter published in the Daily Chronicle (London) of 28th September, 1903, he thus further expresses his opinion of the Congo Administration:

I was present on the Congo at the birth of the Congo Free State. In 1882-1883 I paid a prolonged visit of eight months to Stanley. During the course of this visit I travelled up the Congo nearly as far as the point where it crosses the Equator. I came into continual contact with the Belgian officers and officials who had been sent out on the part of the Comité d’Études du Haut-Congo to assist Stanley. I may mention that I was “nobody’s” man. I paid my own travelling expenses, and had no reason to espouse any one cause more than another. I conceived, however, the highest admiration for Sir Henry Stanley, personally, and for the work he was doing. I convinced myself over and over again by constant cross-examination of the natives of the Congo, and of Zanzibaris and Somalis, that Sir Henry was always just and never cruel, and that the first interests he had at heart were those of the natives of Africa. His memory still lingers in all the regions from the mouth of the Congo to Zanzibar, and any one who doubts the justice of my opinion has only to do as I have done through many years—question the natives as to their impressions of “Bula Matadi” (the Breaker of Stones). Nor did I at that date see anything to object to in the conduct of the Belgian officers, for many of whom I entertained feelings of warm friendship and esteem. The work of such men as Nilis, Van Gèle, Hanssens, Coquilhat, Braconnier, Janssen, and Roger, not to mention others, was such as no missionary could or did find fault with.

And again:

Subsequently when I returned to the vicinity of those regions as Commissioner for British Central Africa, I came a good deal into contact with the Belgian officers sent to control those countries. I never received any complaints from natives or Europeans at that time which tended to show that the natives were ill-treated by the Belgians.

Lastly comes this convincing pronouncement:

In 1900, whilst at work in Uganda, I had occasion to visit the adjoining regions of the Congo Free State along and across the Semliki River. In this portion of the Congo Forest (into which my expedition penetrated for about thirty miles west of the Semliki) I questioned many natives—Pigmies, Babira, Bambuba, Lendu, Bakonjo, and Basongora. From none of them did I receive the slightest complaint as regards the treatment they received from the Belgians, and indeed the sight of their villages, plantations, and settlements, the fact that they so freely came and talked to the white man, were sufficient to show that they were perfectly content with their present lot. The Belgian and Swedish officers whom I met in this portion of the territory of the Congo Free State were men of the best character. In short, this portion of Congo territory left little to be desired, and in some respects was better organised than the adjoining districts of the British Protectorate. One Musongora chief complained to me that the native soldiers in Belgian employ had taken away some of his wives. He expressed himself so dissatisfied with this treatment that he asked permission to cross over into British territory. That permission was given him; but when he found that he had to pay the hut tax on Uganda soil he returned to his old quarters. In addition to the foregoing experiences I might say that I took into my employ about this time natives of many districts along the Upper Congo, from the country of Bangala on the west to the mouth of the Aruwimi on the east. I did this with the idea of making studies of their languages, and they lived with me for about a year, accompanying me on all my journeys through the Uganda Protectorate. I did not ask the permission of the Belgians to recruit these people, for the very good reason that, having apparently complete liberty of action, they had walked through the Congo Forest to the British frontier to offer themselves for work. It cannot be said therefore that the Belgians selected people especially to fill my ears with pleasing stories as to Belgian administration. I questioned these natives of villages all along the great northern bend of the Congo. Not one of them had any complaint to make against the Belgians. When I was preparing to leave Uganda to return to England I offered these men (who were accompanied by their wives) plots of land in the Uganda Protectorate; but they were quite decided in wishing to return to their homes on the Upper Congo; and so far as I know they did so, as every facility was given them in that direction. It strikes one that if these particular people were living under a reign of terror they would hardly have been so eager to return to their homes with the wages they had earned.

The absolute impartiality of Sir Harry Johnston’s review of the Congo Administration well appears in the few following words; in which it will be noted, that while he claims no immaculate perfection on behalf of every Belgian official, he compares them as a body, and that not to their disadvantage, with his own countrymen:

There are, no doubt, bad Belgians, as there have been bad, cruel, and wicked Englishmen and Scotchmen, amongst African pioneers. In the early days of African enterprise I have seen too many misdeeds of my own countrymen in Africa to be very keen about denouncing other nations for similar faults.

MAJOR JAMES HARRISON