Page images
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER II

LEOPOLD II AND STANLEY

It was at this juncture that King Leopold II of Belgium intervened with results which can hardly have been anticipated even by the most enthusiastic dreams of that farseeing prince. The curiosity of Belgian historians has accumulated abundant evidence of the restless ambition. which made the bounds of his small kingdom and the bondage of a constitutional monarchy amid a people jealous of liberty from the first irksome to the King, and drove him to ever new dreams of foreign adventure.1 The natural limitations of his position were increased by the neutrality which Europe had, unwisely for herself, and largely at the instance of Prussia, imposed on Belgium, and which precluded the King from any effective participation in the high politics which he loved. The conditions of the day were not favourable for the success of his ambitions: the Belgians were not a colonizing people and remained cold to suggestions of foreign adventure, and the occupation of the most favoured spots for settlement limited severely the possibilities of action. Projects of occupation of territory in Borneo, in Oceania, or in South America could hardly bear fruit, and it is scarcely to be wondered at that his mind should have turned to the conception of securing African territory. Direct annexation, however, he was powerless to effect: he could have expected little or no support for such a proposal in Belgium, and the powers which already had possessions in Africa were certain to regard with disfavour any new-comer, however little they themselves might be inclined to exercise effectively the rights which they claimed or might adduce.

1 Masoin, Histoire, i. 15–19.

[ocr errors]

Personal ambition and the desire to aggrandize the kingdom which he ruled must be deemed the motives which actuated the King in his efforts for the exploitation of Africa. His own account, indeed, of his aims was far other: he presented himself throughout his career to the world as one who was animated in all his actions by the most noble and enlightened philanthropy, and for many years the world was content to take him at his own valuation, and to acclaim with one voice the generous monarch, who so nobly conceived, ably conducted, and munificently sustained the enterprise which has obtained the recognition of all the great powers of the world, and has ended in the establishment of the Congo State'.1 But it is impossible to accept as historical this version of the King's motives, or even to accept as a compromise the theory that motives of philanthropy gradually decayed amid temptation to personal ends. All the actions of the King can be explained without difficulty or improbability on the theory of personal ambition, and such a motive is infinitely more likely to have led to the perversion of his later days than so noble an impulse as philanthropy, however corrupted and misled. Nor in imputing this motive to the King is any slur necessarily cast on his character: ambition and grandiose conceptions can scarcely be deemed other than venial in a monarch, and praise should not be denied his doubtless genuine desire to magnify his country and enrich his people.

It is, however, a very different thing to accept the view that the King acted on personal motives of ambition in his African adventure and to believe, as do his admirers, that from the first he saw the result of his action, and deliberately brought about the end which he attained. Even royal foresight is limited by the imperfections of human intelligence and conditions of time and place, and, when the King took

1 The words of Stanley's dedication to the King of his work on The Congo. Cf. Sir E. Malet's declaration on behalf of the United Kingdom in C. 4361, p. 254. Lord Granville had presentiments of evil (Fitzmaurice, ii. 356), but Sir H. Johnston (Journ. Soc. Comp. Leg. xviii. 30, 31) still believes in the original good faith of the King.

the decisive steps of summoning to his palace at Brussels on September 12, 1876, a great gathering of explorers and men of science from foreign lands, it can only be held that he realized the possibility that this means would afford him the opportunity of aggrandizement which he had so long sought. In calling this meeting the King acted strictly in his personal capacity, but he was remarkably successful in securing the satisfactory representation of those sections of opinion in the chief countries of Europe which were interested in African exploration. Great Britain had among her representatives Sir Bartle Frere, Mr. (later Sir) William Mackinnon,1 and Sir Fowell Buxton; Germany sent with others Dr. Nachtigal and Dr. Schweinfurth; and, besides Belgium, Austria-Hungary, France, Italy, and Russia sent representatives. In each case the representatives had no official mandate; they represented not governments but geographical societies, or were invited on the ground of their eminence in the field of exploration or philanthropy. A After three days' session the Conference broke up: its chief outcome was the passing of a resolution in favour of the creation of an International Commission, the African International Association, with its seat at Brussels, with a view to the exploration and civilization of Central Africa, and the establishment of National Committees in each country willing to take part in the work, who would collect subscriptions for the common aim, and select delegates to serve on the International Commission.

What would have been the outcome of the project, had it ever been carried into effect, must be left to speculation: the glorious vista of international action bringing light and healing to the dark places of Africa was dispelled at once by the negative attitude of the Royal Geographical Society, to which fell the duty of organizing the English National

1 The leading spirit of the East Africa Company, which did much in the following decade to support British interests in East Africa. He continued to interest himself in the King's scheme (Johnston, George Grenfell, i. 408). An interesting account of him is given, on the occasion of his death (June 22, 1893), by Stanley, Autobiography, pp. 446-9.

[ocr errors]

Committee. Fear of the unknown and reluctance even to seem to encourage encroachment on territories to which Britain might seem to have a prior claim doubtless explain the decision that the National Committee while maintaining friendly relations of correspondence with the Belgian and other Committees, should not trammel itself with engagements of an international nature, or with objects other than those connected with geography'. In consequence of this decision no delegates were appointed to the International Commission, and the way was left open for the domination of the Commission by the King himself. Stimulated by his enthusiasm, the Belgian National Committee was formally constituted at a meeting of November 6, 1876, and the objects contemplated by it declared to be the suppression of the slave trade and the exploration of Africa. In Germany a National Committee was created which decreed on December 18, 1876, the formation of the German African Society to carry out the same objects as the International Commission, viz. the scientific exploration of the unknown regions of Central Africa; the opening up of Central Africa to civilization and commerce; and, as ulterior object, the extinction of the slave trade. But even in this case the international ideal was departed from, for it was agreed that of the funds raised only a small portion should be remitted to the International Commission, the major part being reserved for German works of exploration and discovery. National Committees were also established by Austria-Hungary, France, Holland, Italy, Portugal, Russia, Spain, and Switzerland, but even the Swiss Committee reserved part of its funds for national work, and France and Italy devoted the subscriptions raised to exploration work in the regions which immediately concerned them, the Gaboon and Abyssinia respectively. The withdrawal of Britain was in some measure repaired by the addition of the United States to the number of countries in which National Committees were created.

Recorded in the Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society for July, 1877; reprinted by Stanley, The Congo, i. 33–7.

The International Commission held its first and only plenary session at Brussels on June 20 and 21, 1877, when delegates were present from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Holland, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States, the absence of Russian and Portuguese representatives being accidental. An executive committee consisting of General H. S. Sanford,1 Dr. Nachtigal, and M. de Quatrefages, representing the English-speaking, the Germanic and Latin races, was definitely set up, and measures were concerted for carrying into effect the objects of the Association. An important step was taken in the adoption of a special flag for the expeditions of the Association, a golden star on a blue ground-suggested according to one version 2 by the flag used by the King of San Salvador, and definite principles were laid down defining the purposes to be served by a chain of posts, which it was proposed to establish on the route from Zanzibar to the lakes. The personnel of the post were to carry out all kinds of scientific research, astronomical, meteorological, ethnographical, linguistic, and biological, to entertain travellers, and advise them, and by their civilizing influence to suppress the slave trade. The amounts of the contributions announced at this meeting revealed clearly that the work had ceased to be international:/ Belgium could report the raising of a total of 287,000 fr., and annual subscriptions of 44,000 fr. with further sums to follow, and by June, 1879, the Belgian total had exceeded 600,000 fr., against which there were merely small sums from Germany, Austria-Hungary, Switzerland, and Holland. Of the funds expended on the missions dispatched by the Association a large portion was undoubtedly provided by the King, who completely dominated the Association, and succeeded in obtaining the enthusiastic co-operation of General H. S. Sanford, who appears to have had a truly 1 In place of Sir Bartle Frere, selected at the original meeting, when British co-operation was still expected (Masoin, Histoire, i. 22).

2 Johnston, George Grenfell, i. 87; for other versions see Masoin, Histoire, i. 25, n. 1; ii. 380. It seems probable that the flag was a European invention.

3 At one time United States Minister to Belgium; for his views see a

« PreviousContinue »