This page is referenced by:

• 1 media/Thumb 152.png 2024-12-03T13:19:14-05:00 "German Slavery" 17 Benito Sylvain condemns the rumoured German authorization of the slave trade in Zanzibar plain 2024-12-10T10:38:00-05:00 09-24-1890 Translation:At the same time that the anti-slavery movement launched by His Eminence Cardinal Lavigerie was reaching it most beautiful extent, a rumour spread, thanks to an article in the Times, that the agents of Germany in Zanzibar had proclaimed the liberty of commerce in slaves at Bagamoyo, and that it had granted licenses to these monstrous traffickers in human flesh.
  
  The news of such a fact, if it were true, would constitute a horrible and flagrant violation of the spirit of the letter and of the declarations of the general Act of the Brussels Conference—would be greeted with stupefaction by the entire civilized world.
  
  The Cabinet in Berlin immediately telegraphed to Africa to ask for information on the reported fact.
  
  Mr. Schmidt, who is serving as imperial commissioner on the east coast of Africa, officially declared that: "there has been no proclamation about slave commerce at Bagamoyo. No licenses have been granted to slave merchants. It is false that Zanzibar slave merchants have come to establish themselves on the German coast to practise their trade.
  
  "These rumours were spread by Arabs, and they were immediately untruthfully exploited against the Germans."
  
  The English press, raising a general outcry, energetically sullied this conduct of the Germans—which they were quick to qualify as "infamous."
  
  The Morning Post sees is as "a monstrous denial of the professions of humanitarian faith of Emperor Wilhelm II, and" the newspaper adds, "if a protest is inadequate to bring about the annulation of this abominable decree, Europe must show its displeasure by more effective means."
  
  The German press shot back at the English, reminding them that Gordon's first act on arriving in Khartoum was to proclaim the maintenance of slavery. The English objected that this was a provisional maintenance, so as not to harm the customs of populations they hoped to win over.
  
  All ills are deniable. The German commissioner at Zanzibar denies the existence of the authorization that the Times correspondent "saw posted at Bagamoyo and Dar es Salaam, signed by the German functionaries at these stations." But, when it published these denials, the German Empire Monitor announce that an investigation would be opened.
  
  This denial has encountered, by the way, many sceptics. Mr. Auguste Vacquerie, our eminent colleague, said on the subject in the Rappel: "What surprises me is that the English are surprised that Emperor Wilhelm could be a socialist in Berlin and a slaver in Zanzibar at the same time."
  
  It is true—and worth remembering—that the Germans never stopped saying that slavery was a necessary evil in Africa. Their reasoning was simple: since they cannot maintain themselves in Africa without the slave merchant who hold the coast and the frequented routes, they must draw these slave merchants to the German side by authorizing their commerce.
  
  This is—as we see it—very judicious from the practical and German point of view, but from the human point of view, it is simply shameful for such a civilized European state to have officially authorized the slave trade.
  
  Many times, no doubt, England has secretly protected slave traders, showing that in colonial matters the question of interests surpasses all others, but a crime does not become less abominable because it is committed by a large number.
  
  While we wait for the truth to break through and set responsibilities, may our protest rise and make its way to the German Emperor as an echo of indignation of the civilized Blacks of Haiti!
  
  Benito Sylvain