Max Havelaar;

by Multatuli

If it is now taken for granted, as it may be, that a Resident has no direct advantage in extortion, and the tyrannical disposal of the population, the question presents itself, what then induces many to tolerate such abuses, without acquainting the Government with them, and that contrary to their oath and duty? And he who thinks about this, must think it very strange indeed, that the existence of these abuses is so coolly acknowledged, as if it were a question of something out of reach or competence. I will try to explain the causes of this.

To bring bad news is generally disagreeable, and it seems as if something of this unfavourable impression sticks to him whose lot it is to communicate them. Now, when this alone is a reason with some for denying, while they know better, the existence of something unfavourable, how much more this becomes the case, if one runs the risk, not only of falling into the disgrace, which seems to be the fate of the bringer of bad tidings, but, at the same time, of being regarded as the cause of them.

The Government of Dutch India likes to write home to its masters in the mother country that all goes on satisfactorily. The Residents like to announce this to the Government. The Assistant Residents, who receive themselves from their Controllers nothing but favourable accounts, send [[262]]again, in their turn, no disagreeable tidings to the Residents. From all this arises in the official written accounts of these matters, an artificial optimism, contradictory not only to the truth, but also to the real opinions of these optimists themselves, as soon as they treat these same matters by word of mouth, or, what is still more curious, even in contradiction to their own written reports. I can cite many examples of reports that rate very high the prosperous condition of a Residency, but at the same time give themselves the lie, especially when accompanied by figures. These examples would,—if the matter were not too serious on account of the final consequences,—give occasion for laughter and satire, and the naïveté is really astonishing, with which, in such cases, the grossest untruths are maintained; though the writer exposes himself, a few sentences further on, to the weapons with which these untruths can be rebutted. I will quote a single example, to which I could add many more. Among the documents which I have before me I find the yearly account of a Residency. The Resident praises the flourishing state of trade, and asserts that everywhere the greatest prosperity and activity are to be seen. A little further on, he speaks of the scanty means which he has in his power to prevent smuggling; but to take away the disagreeable impression which would be produced on the Government at the thought that in his Residency many import duties are evaded, “No,” he immediately adds, “there is no fear of that; little or nothing is [[263]]smuggled into my Residency, for … so little business is done here, that nobody would venture his capital in the trade.”

I have read a Report that commenced with the words, “During the past year, in this Residency, tranquillity has remained tranquil.…”[10] Such phrases certainly testify to a very tranquil tranquillity founded on the indulgence of the Government to every one who spares it disagreeable tidings, or, as the saying goes, “does not bother it with sad reports!”

Where the population does not increase, it is ascribed to inexactness in the census of former years. Where the taxes do not rise, this circumstance must be attributed to the necessity for a low taxation, in order to encourage agriculture, which will eventually—that is to say, when the writer of the Report shall have retired from office,—be sure to produce inestimable treasures. Where disturbances have taken place, that could not be concealed, they were occasioned by a few malefactors, and need be no more feared for the future, as there exists a general contentment. Where poverty or famine has thinned the population, this was the consequence of scarcity, drought, rain, or something else,——NEVER OF MISGOVERNMENT.

The memorandum of Havelaar’s predecessor, wherein he ascribed the emigration of the people from the district of Parang-Koodjang to “excessive abuses,” lies before me. [[264]]This notice was unofficial, and contained matters about which this functionary had to speak to the Resident of Bantam. But in vain Havelaar sought in the archives for a proof that his predecessor had described plainly what he meant by its true name in a public official missive.

In short, the official reports of the functionaries to the Government, and likewise the reports founded thereupon which are sent to the Government in the mother country, are for the greater and more important part UNTRUE.[11] I know that this accusation is serious; yet I maintain it, and feel myself capable of proving it. Whosoever is angry because of this undisguised utterance of my opinion, let him consider how many millions of money, how many human lives might have been spared to England, if the eyes of the Nation had been opened in time to the true condition of affairs in British India. Let him consider what a large debt of gratitude would have been due to the man that had had the courage to be the Job’s comforter before it was too late to repair the wrong without bloodshed.[12]

I said that I could prove the charge. I will show, where it is necessary, that famine often reigned in regions that had been held up as models of prosperity; and where it was said that the population was tranquil and contented, I assert that it was often on the verge of a furious [[265]]outbreak. It is not my intention to give these proofs in this book; yet I trust that it will not be laid aside, without the readers believing that these proofs exist.

For the present I confine myself to another and unique example of the ridiculous optimism of which I have spoken, an example that will be understood by every one, whether acquainted or not with Indian affairs.

Every Resident sends in a monthly statement of the rice that has been imported into his province or exported elsewhere. These statements show how much of this rice is exported or imported. On comparing the quantity of rice which, according to the returns, is transported from Residencies in Java to Residencies in Java, we shall see that this quantity amounts to many thousand more picols (Javanese weight) than the rice that, according to the same returns, is imported into Residencies in Java from Residencies in Java.[13]