Chapter IX: Section 7: Amended to read, “One bridge at the place where the Liberian (4)

Again, there are not many paying “jobs”; those that exist are already occupied by native sons and old settlers; the coming of a considerable number of new immigrants will not increase the number of these “jobs” in proportion to the influx of population. The new-comers will crowd those who are already located; lack of opportunity, scantness of educational facilities, inability to secure a proper preparation--all things which are in the nature of Liberian conditions and for which the individual can not be held responsible,--give to those already in possession a sense of inferiority and unpreparedness which makes them fear the coming of the outsider who has had a wider training. Whatever they may say to the contrary, however much they may express the desire that highly trained and competent Americans should come to the aid of the Republic, the whole official and governing body will look with natural suspicion and jealousy upon intruders.

It is commonplace to be told by Liberians that there is plenty of work in the Republic for carpenters, masons, blacksmiths, and wheelwrights. This is said so readily that it sounds like a recitation learned for repetition. That there may be room for carpenters and masons is probable; but the need of blacksmiths in a country where there are no real vehicles or horses is less evident; and exactly what a wheelwright would do to fill his time is questionable. There are at present in Liberia almost no manufactories; it will surely be some time before there is need of such. There are in Liberia no opportunities for day labor for American negroes; the “bush nigger” is there and will work for wages which no American colored man could think of receiving if he were able to work at such labor in that country. It has been suggested to me that thousands of American negroes might be employed in road-building; there is indeed much need for roads; but the work of road-building is likely to continue to fall to the native. Newcomers are almost certain to go into professional life, politics, trade, or agriculture. Professional life and politics are already fairly full--trade and agriculture remain as legitimate opportunities for the newcomer. The American negro who comes to Liberia for trade must have capital, and he must realize that he enters into competition with old established white trading houses as well as with experienced Liberians who know the country and its needs. If the newcomer goes into agriculture, he must expect to make some outlay in securing land, constructing buildings, buying outfits; curiously enough, even in this field, where it might be supposed that he would meet with little, if any, opposition, he is quite sure to encounter hostility from neighbors. Into whatever field of legitimate enterprise the American immigrant may plan to enter, he should not come to Africa unless he is healthy of body, young, of active mind, fairly educated, and with money for tiding over a period of non-productiveness and opposition more or less frank and open.

Yet many succeed. Conspicuous examples are not wanting. Three recent cases may be considered typical. There is J. H. Green, who came to Liberia from Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1902; a lawyer by trade, he had been interested while still in the United States in the promotion of Liberian immigration; he carried with him into the new region his paper, _The African League_, which is a monthly periodical largely devoted to the encouragement of Liberian immigration. At first in Monrovia, since then at Buchanan, he has continued to print his paper which has the longest continued existence of any genuine newspaper that has been printed in Liberia for many years; he has encountered constant opposition; he is a fighter from way back and has the courage of his convictions. He has made good. He practices law, has been a local judge, conducts a successful, influential, and outspoken paper, has his printing-house, and conducts a shop for trade. Judge T. McCants Stewart is justly respected as one of the leading men of the Republic. He first went to Liberia thirty years ago, in connection with Liberia College; he stayed but a short time, returning to the United States; while in this country, he published an interesting and useful little book upon Liberia; later he went to Honolulu, Hawaii; returning to America from our newest territory, he closed out his affairs in this land and went again to Liberia; as a newcomer, he necessarily had prejudice and opposition to encounter; he has rooted there, however, and, respected and influential, is now one of the associate justices of the Supreme Court. One of the most interesting men in Liberia to-day is Jeff Faulkner; he is active, enterprising, pushing, indefatigable; he is the only handy, all-around mechanician in Monrovia; he is absolutely one of the most useful men in the Republic; he is depended upon by the government in many a time of need; when “the Lark” goes to the bottom, Jeff Faulkner is the only man to raise her; he has a keen eye for business, and develops every opportunity; he has recently established an ice-factory, and his ice-cream parlor--a novelty in Liberia’s capital--is popular. This very useful man, though well appreciated, has literally had to fight his way to success. These men are well established, but they have succeeded only because they were men of ideas, conviction, purpose, determination. Weak men in their positions would have failed. Liberia is no place for weaklings; there is no demand for immigrants who leave America because they have been failures there.

For years Green has been agitating for “the negro city”. In the _African League_, in 1903, he carried a page announcement regarding it. From it we quote some extracts: “THE NEGRO CITY to be built in LIBERIA, AFRICA, BY 1000 AMERICAN NEGROES. LIBERIA CITY will be the name. Foundation to be laid upon the arrival of the great colony early in 1904. Let all be ready and fully prepared for the great corner-stone laying of a great negro town in a HIGH AND HEALTHY PLACE. Stones wanted for the foundation. What kind of stones? Stones in the form of men! Self-sacrificing, vigorous, fearless, strong-hearted, self-supporting, brainy, brawny, God-fearing men? Men fitted for the sub-stratum of the great town in the great country where lynching is not known, and freedom reigns supreme! Where your son may be a beggar or a ruler--at his own election. Come and make him a ruler. . . . A city built in a day. The foundation of this new settlement with the town as the centre, will be laid upon the arrival of the colonists from America upon the ground. . . . A high and beautiful location, too high for the coast fever that is so much dreaded by the one who has heard about it--a location for work in a country where gold and other precious metals abound. . . . This place is especially inviting to the mining negro. The artisans are needed, too, along with the farmers and other workmen, for all these are needed in building up a great republic; only let them bring some capital. This is a great place for merchants. . . . Let all who want to join this colony and want a town lot and a farm in the section, free of charge, write.” So far the great negro settlement does not actually exist. The idea has been often ridiculed; but it deserves consideration. At the time in question, Mr. Green made an extended journey in which he claimed to be looking for the best site for his settlement. Such a city, with anywhere from three hundred to one thousand inhabitants, would promise a more speedy and durable success than the trickling in of the same number of immigrants as individuals. There is strength in numbers; a common interest would bind the newcomers to each other; if they really represented a variety of trades and industries, the community might be sufficient to itself; individual jealousies of old settlers would be reduced to a minimum of harmfulness. There would naturally be, in case such a settlement were established, strong jealousy between it as a whole and longer established communities. Such has always been the case in Liberian history. There has always been feeling between Monrovia, Grand Bassa, Greenville, and Maryland. Such jealousies are natural and unavoidable. The only way in which they can be reduced is by the establishment of so many communities that the distance between them would be small; close contact would develop at least a fair degree of harmony.

There are prominent negroes in our own country who have urged an exodus of black men from the United States. The difficulties of transporting our millions of black men, women, and children to Africa, if they care to go, are so great as to render the scheme actually impracticable. Nor is the difficulty of transportation the only one. The limited range of promising occupations makes it unlikely that great numbers will ever go thither; more than that, pronounced success in the United States,--and pronounced success to-day is by no means rare among our colored population,--will hold the majority of colored people in this country. There is, however, room in Liberia for many thousands of settlers and opportunity for those among them who have no foolish notions and who possess the qualities which Green demands from those whom he invites to come. Bishop Turner and Dr. Heard urge migration on the largest possible scale; Dr. Ernest Lyon who, at the time when the excitement in regard to Liberia City was at its height, represented our government as minister to Liberia, discourages “indiscriminate immigration”. His report sent late in 1903 to Secretary Hay, of our Department of State, was a dash to the high hopes of the encouragers of immigration. His letter was called out by the proposed large emigration from the United States in 1904. He says: “From my knowledge of the conditions of affairs here, I beg to inform you that Liberia is not prepared for indiscriminate immigration in 1904. If immigrants come here who are unable to support themselves for at least six months, they will die from starvation and the rigor of the African climate--there are no houses here, even of a temporary construction, to protect them until they can build for themselves.” As might be expected, this report of the resident Minister called forth a vigorous reply from Mr. Green. He closes his answer with an actually able burst of feeling. He says: “As to indiscriminate immigration, it was that that planted the colony of Liberia; it was indiscriminate immigration which gave birth to a Republic to which the Rev. Dr. Lyon might be accredited United States Minister; it was this immigration scheme that gave us a President Roberts, a Benson, a Gardner, a Coleman. It reinforced, succored, perpetuated the Republic in its infancy. It was indiscriminate immigration which gave Liberia the grave and distinguished statesman, His Excellency, President A. Barclay, our present and honored incumbent. Yes, and more than that, even America is a child of indiscriminate immigration which yet constitutes the greatest increase of American humanity. It made America great. May it not make Liberia great?” Thousands of American black men might no doubt move to Liberia with advantage and profit to themselves and to their adopted country. The Republic offers a rich field. But it needs no idlers, no paupers, no criminals. No one should go without having clear ideas as to his plans; the questions of “receptacle”, location, temporary support, must be looked into and provided for. And the newcomer who is to be successful must be forceful, self-reliant, and ready to meet with temporary prejudice. While the conditions of many blacks might be improved by removal to Liberia, the black population in this country would be advantaged by the elimination; if a considerable number of emigrants were to go to Liberia, pressure here would be relieved and conditions would be improved.

There will of course be a constant trickling of newcomers from this country to Liberia; there may very well be a constant stream. Such a stream indeed is necessary, if the vigor and vitality of Liberia is to be maintained; new blood is desirable--whether welcome or not. Know-nothing-ism is not confined to Liberia or to any one place. In the United States we have a condition which is comparable to that which Liberia presents. Here, too, the old population is barely holding its own, if it is doing so; the old families of New England and the eastern seaboard have largely run to seed; it is absolutely necessary that a great and steady immigration of European whites pour in to maintain our life by the infusion of new blood. Such immigration of course is not welcomed by our “true Americans”. If rigid exclusion could be practiced, we should soon face a condition much like that of France. If we are to live and occupy a significant place among the nations of the world, we must accept this constant incoming of population from outside. The mixture of these newcomers with our own people, fagged and worn out by new and unfavorable conditions, produces a new stock with sufficient vigor to carry on our national development. The hope of Liberia lies largely in a considerable immigration of black people from our southern states.

One of the most serious dangers of Liberia lies in its isolation; it needs contact; everything that tends toward an increase of contact with the outside world is good. Liberia needs ideas, friends, interchange; otherwise stagnation is inevitable--and death. She must receive these aids either from Europe or from America; she will of course receive them from both; but the source of the greater part of her inspiration and ideals must be on this side of the Atlantic and from our people of color. Immigration from America, whether small or great, must necessarily be helpful. If great and constant, difficulties will be lightened and helpful bonds strengthened.

If the temporary management in the hands of others of a part of our
governmental machinery will result in actual and permanent
independence and international respect, which I firmly believe will be
the outcome, then it becomes our imperative duty as patriotic citizens
to make such a necessary and noble sacrifice.--DANIEL E. HOWARD.

THE FOREIGN DEBT OF THE REPUBLIC.

THE LOAN OF 1870.

On January 26, 1870, the Legislature authorized President Edward J. Roye to negotiate a loan not exceeding £100,000, at not more than 7 per cent interest; the bonds were to run for fifteen years, and three years’ interest advanced might be deducted. Of the sum to be received upon this loan £20,000 was to be used in buying up all the checks, scripts, currency debentures, and government paper of whatever kind then afloat; £20,000 more was to be deposited securely as a basis for the issue of a paper currency in what were to be known as Treasury Notes; the balance of the proceeds of the loan was to be deposited in some reliable bank as an emergency fund to be drawn upon at need by special act of the Legislature.

At the time when this action of the Legislature was taken, President Roye was about to go to England; it was supposed that he would attend to the business while in London, and that considerable expense would be saved to the nation by his personal attention to the details of the arrangement; for some reason or other, he did not take up the matter while he was absent. On his return to Monrovia, however, he proceeded to secure the loan. He appointed David Chinery, at that time consul for Liberia in London, Henry V. Johnson, Sr., and W. S. Anderson, commissioners--the two latter being sent to London for the purpose--to negotiate the loan. President Roye should of course have submitted this whole matter to the Legislature; there was considerable objection to the loan, and no serious steps should have been taken regarding it without the authorization of the legislative body. The commissioners succeeded in negotiating the loan for £100,000 at 7 per cent interest, at 30 per cent below par; three years’ interest were deducted from the £70,000, leaving a balance of £49,000 to be placed to the credit of the commissioners. “Then followed,” to quote the words of President Roberts, “a system of charges, speculations, and frauds unparalleled, I presume, in any public loan transactions of modern times.” No sooner had the news of the negotiation reached President Roye, than he commenced to draw against it for himself and others, not waiting for any part of it to be paid into the treasury of the Republic for the purposes specified in the act, and before the Legislature had accepted the loan or taken any action in regard to it. More than that, without legislative authority, he sent an order drawn by the Secretary of the Treasury--a member of his own family--approved by himself for £10,000 value of merchandise, alleging that this was on account of the government. Mr. Chinery, in filling this order, sent merchandise invoiced at more than £14,000, including transportation, shipping-charges, freight, insurance, etc., most of the articles being charged at amounts in excess of their market value, many of them inferior in quality, and some nearly, and others entirely, useless in Liberia. How much was actually realized of this loan no one knows; Sir Harry Johnston says £27,000; Ferguson (from whom we draw most of the particulars regarding this transaction) says £17,903. In return for it, at least £80,000 in bonds were issued--Sir Harry Johnston says perhaps the whole £100,000.

The moment was one of political disturbance. In 1869 there had been an effort to amend the constitution so as to extend the office of President from a term of two years to one of four; the effort failed. In May, 1871, when his two years had elapsed, Roye attempted to continue himself in power for two years longer; a shadow of an excuse for this usurpation was found in this attempted passing of an amendment. This bold coup, together with the dissatisfaction regarding the loan, led to his being hurled from power. Notice of the disturbed condition of the Republic was at once sent to the representative of Liberia in London, and to the bondholders; the newly established government ordered all drafts, etc., for money received on account of the loan to be stopped, countermanded the orders for goods, and demanded a _statu quo_ until the Legislature should have a chance to act; legal proceedings were taken against Commissioners Johnson and Anderson; Chinery was discharged from his office as Liberian Consul in London; Mr. John Jackson was appointed Consul-General in his place and took charge of matters. So palpable was the mismanagement of this whole transaction in London, and so extravagant had been the charges and other outlays connected with it, that Consul Jackson took legal proceedings to protect the interests of the Republic.

Through a period of almost thirty years, the matter of this loan was constantly agitated, and it was only in 1898 that the Liberian Consul, Henry Hayman, was able to bring about a final arrangement of the unhappy affair. At that time the Liberian Government recognized its responsibility to the amount of £80,000; it agreed to begin payment at once upon the bonds--paying interest at the rate of 3 per cent the first three years, 4 per cent for the following three years, and 5 per cent thereafter until both the principal and interest be fully paid; after that, the back interests would be assumed at 5 per cent. Since this adjustment, the Liberian Government has regularly and honorably met its interest payments. Sir Harry Johnston, in his great work on Liberia, speaks vigorously and frankly regarding this loan of 1870, which was a disgraceful operation for British financiers.

THE LOAN OF 1906.

It is curious that, in connection with the next financial undertaking of the Republic, which was little, if any, more satisfactory than the loan of 1870, Sir Harry himself should have played a significant part. When President Barclay and his companions were in London in 1906, they made arrangements for a new loan, also of £100,000. An interview was held at the office of Consul-General Hayman, at which were present Sir Harry H. Johnston, chairman of the Liberian Development Co., Limited, together with some of this company’s officers, Mr. Clark of the Foreign Office, Emil Erlanger, and Consul Hayman. Mr. Erlanger represented the brokers through whom the Liberian Development Co. were to secure a loan of £100,000 for the benefit of Liberia. Excellent discussions of this loan by Mr. Ellis, who was so long connected with our Legation at Monrovia, and Mr. Scott, who was a member of the United States Commission in 1909, have been printed. It is from these articles that we draw our details.

The proceeds of the loan of 1906 were to be applied in the following manner: (a) $25,000 was to be used for pressing Liberian obligations; (b) $125,000 was to be employed in the payment of domestic debts; (c) $35,000 was to be loaned to the Liberian Development Co.; (d) the balance was to be devoted to the development of banking, and for road schemes by the Liberian Development Co. in Liberia. As security for this loan, two British officials, as chief and assistant inspectors of customs, were to have charge of the Liberian customs revenue; the chief inspector was to act also as financial adviser to the Republic; $30,000 annually (in semi-annual payments) was to be turned in as interest until the whole loan was repaid; 10 per cent of any excess over $250,000 in customs revenue per year was to be received by the Liberian Development Co. The “company was charged with the responsibility of returning the loan to Erlanger and Co. by the payment of 50 per cent of the net profits derived from the exercise of the powers and privileges of the charter of the former company, together with profits from the banking and road schemes to be undertaken in Liberia.”

The loan was actually applied as follows: (a) to the extinguishment of domestic debts, £30,000; (b) loaned to the Liberian Development Co., £7000; (c) in carrying out road schemes, £32,776.11.3; (d) obtained by Liberia on ratification of tripartite agreement of 1908, £30,223.8.9; total, £100,000.

Friction soon arose in the administration of the customs. The Liberian Development Co. constructed fifteen miles of automobile road in the Careysberg District, bought a small steam launch for the St. Paul’s River, and purchased two automobiles; it then announced that its road fund was completely exhausted, after having spent, on an ordinary dirt road, about $163,882. Liberian dissatisfaction was great, and question was raised regarding the “balance of the £70,000 which had been entrusted without security to the management of the company.” In the investigation which followed in an attempt to rearrange affairs, considerable feeling appears to have been shown. Sir Harry Johnston had repeatedly ignored the requests of President Barclay for an accounting by his company; in the interview in which efforts at adjustment were made, he is said to have conducted himself in a supercilious manner and to have expressed his surprise “that the President should have required the company to furnish him with a statement of accounts, and disclaimed any responsibility for the manner in which the money had been expended”. Under the tripartite arrangement which was entered into between the Government of Liberia, Erlanger and Co., and the Liberian Development Co., Chartered and Limited, it was finally arranged that “Liberia assume direct responsibility to Messrs. Erlanger and Co. for the loan of 1906, and, aside from obtaining some advantages in the new Agreement, secured from the Liberian Development Co. the residue of the loan, amounting to £30,223.8.9, and practically dispensed with the future services of this company in the solution of the new Liberian problems.”

Mr. Emmett Scott makes some pertinent observations in connection with this affair. He says: “Sir Harry Johnston, in his book, quite spiritedly criticizes the agreements under the loan of 1871. It is hard to determine, however, how less one-sided they were than those of his own benevolent corporation, even if his company had in perfect good faith carried out their part of the bargain. The suggestion that the customs should be collected by European experts, Englishmen being understood, introduced, of course, the feature of external control into the customs service . . . of the so-called experts sent to Liberia under the agreement, the first one’s selection was, to say the least, unfortunate. He all but confessed his utter failure after two or three months to understand what he was about, although he had been granted a salary of about $3500 a year, much more than he had received in the British service in Sierra Leone. The second one appointed has developed into a somewhat capable official, although his chief claim to being called an expert was, it is said, that he had successfully raised oranges in California. He was certainly no customs expert, and, I learn, had probably never been inside of a customs house. He received £500 a year. The present chief inspector of customs is a wholly efficient man, but while doing similar service at Freetown, Sierra Leone, the neighboring country, he received a salary of £300 or $1500 a year, while the Liberians are called upon to pay him a salary of £1000, or $5000 a year. This salary, perhaps I should state, is twice that received by the President of the Republic. Efforts to reduce this salary to £700 or $3500 have recently been made, but with what success I cannot chronicle.”

Again: “The company’s high-handed manner of expending the money on hand, however, engendered so much bad blood, that at last President Barclay applied to Sir Harry Johnston, managing director of the Liberian Development Co., for an accounting. The latter, it is said, expressed the greatest surprise that such a demand should be made upon him, and disclaimed any and all responsibility to the Liberian Government for the way in which the money had been or was to be expended. He persistently refused to render any accounts until he found the position he maintained was so untenable that he could not depend upon his government for support; he also found that President Barclay was about to sever all relations with his company, maintaining, in the absence of any accounting, that the Government of Liberia would hold itself responsible only for the cash actually received. About $200,000 of the amount raised on the credit of the government, it is said, had been frittered away on badly managed schemes.”

And finally: “In dismissing this loan of 1906, may I say that no one now contends that the Liberian Development Co. has, or has had, any money aside from that raised on the Government’s credit; to-day it is practically bankrupt. The relations between the Government and the Company have been severed, and under the agreement of 1908 with Messrs. Erlanger, London, the Liberian Government is responsible for the whole loan.”

THE AMERICAN LOAN.

Conditions became desperate; there were now two obligations to British creditors, each for a handsome sum, and both drawing interest; more than that, there had grown up a considerable domestic debt; real bankruptcy seemed to threaten the nation. As a result of the visit of the American Commission to Liberia in 1909, the United States used its good offices in favor of the Republic, and arrangements were perfected whereby certain banking institutions of the United States, Germany, France, and Great Britain furnished the Republic of Liberia with a loan of $1,700,000; this loan was to be used in the payment of its domestic and foreign debts. According to the official report of the Commission, the public debt of Liberia in 1909 amounted to the sum of $1,289,570.60. Mr. George W. Ellis has prepared an excellent paper regarding this loan, and from it we abbreviate our own statement. In order to secure the loan, the Liberian customs revenues are temporarily to be placed in charge of a customs receivership, with a general receiver appointed from the United States by the President, and holding office during his pleasure, and three receivers, one each from Great Britain, Germany, and France, appointed by, and holding office during the pleasure of, their respective governments. As further security for the loan, the revenues from exports and imports, duties on rubber, and all head moneys are pledged. Five per cent gold bonds in denominations of $1000, $500, and $100, for a period of forty years, interest and principal payable in New York, are to be issued by the Liberian Government. The Liberian revenues subject to the loan are transferred for its service and are termed “assigned revenues”; these assigned revenues are in charge of the receivership. The majority of the receivers have the power to suspend customs officials, make temporary appointments, make rules and regulations relative to the assigned revenues; they have a right to adequate patrol for land and sea, and in case such is not furnished, to supply it themselves. The general receiver has a salary of $5000, the others, $2500. A monthly report of accounts is to be rendered to the government. As a condition of the loan, the frontier police force is to be maintained; the President of the United States is to assign training officers, to be paid from the assigned revenues. The General Receiver is also the Financial Adviser of the Liberian Government; he is to systematize the finances of Liberia; and to approve statements before submission to the legislature. Appropriations must not overrun the revenues; after the legislature adjourns, the President, Secretary of the Treasury, and the Financial Adviser must revise the appropriations if they have overrun; their act is binding to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Financial Adviser co-operates with the government in establishing economical and efficient administration and expenditure. The debts of the Republic are to be at once paid--by bonds where the creditors chose to receive them. The bankers are to receive for their services their out-of-pocket expenses, legal charges, commission on the face value of the 5 per cent bonds, and 5 per cent on the bonds purchased by themselves. Residue bonds are to be held by the fiscal agents to meet approved, unadjusted indebtedness: final residue bonds will be sold and the money paid to Liberia for public improvements approved by the General Receiver. In order that this agreement should go into effect, it was necessary that the Liberian Legislature should pass all necessary measures of approval before January 1, 1912. This was done. There was some delay in finally placing the funds at the disposition of the Liberian Government, but at present everything has been arranged and the new loan is in effect. This arrangement caused general joy throughout the Republic; it was felt not only that it released the people from a heavy and dangerous obligation to unfriendly creditors, but that it probably began a period of closer relationship between the United States and Liberia. It is possible that too much of a feeling of security existed. It is likely that more joy was felt over the receipt of $1,700,000 than of responsibility for its ultimate repayment. On the whole, it must be admitted that the loan is favorable to the Republic. The government has realized a much larger percentage of actual funds than in any of its preceding financial undertakings. There are, however, some weak points in the plan. It is unfortunate that the loan was theoretically made through banks of different nations; as a matter of fact, it was an American enterprise, and should have been so in word as well. There is no reason why foreign nations should be interested--except indeed that Great Britain should experience a sentiment of joy in having the interests of her citizens secured. The sum of $1,700,000 is so small that it could have been easily supplied by American houses and considered a little matter with no actual political relations. That the loan should have been secured by a receivership is just, but it would have been much better to have appointed a single American receiver instead of four men of different nations. In this international receivership there lies considerable danger. Friction is likely. France, England, Germany are suspicious of each other. The simplest act is liable to misconstruction, and one or another of the three sub-receivers is likely to feel his dignity and that of his nation affected, and squabbles are certain to arise. The American receiver, as is proper, is given the position of leadership. Suppose he were to die or be unfit for service; which of the other three receivers will take his place? There appears to be no arrangement made for such a contingency, yet it is quite certain to arise, and if it should, the man who temporarily assumes the duties, will be particularly likely to find himself in trouble. The question as to location of the four receivers may some time or other raise difficulties. Suppose, for example, the British receiver were placed at Cape Mount, adjacent to British territory, and the French receiver were to be located at Cape Palmas, close to French authority; opportunity for unfaithfulness to the Republic would be very great. There is nothing in the history of the past to warrant us in assuming that these officials would be men of such high spirit and principle as to resist temptation. The possibility of difficulties between the General Receiver and the Liberian Government is also very great. He is given large powers; unless he is a man of extraordinary ability and well-balanced character, it is certain that complications will arise; there will be constant risk of his inter-meddling in every field of governmental affairs. Some of these difficulties of course are inherent in a receivership, and as a receivership is absolutely necessary, their risk must be accepted.

On the whole, the American loan should be a great help to Liberia. Friends of the Republic hope for the best results. The government is given a breathing spell, and time and opportunity for the re-adjustment of its economic interests. There is no danger, if the receivership is competent, but that the income of the nation will easily carry the loan with all its obligations, and leave ample funds in balance for the legitimate enterprises of the government. It is reasonable to hope that Liberia has entered upon a period of prosperity.

Yes, I say these were but slaves who gave us the Declaration of
Independence. They were but slaves who framed our Constitution, they
were but slaves who combatted with the odds of life, amidst wars,
devastation, and foreign aggressions to hold intact for us and for our
children this home of ours.--S. D. FERGUSON, JR.

POLITICS.

We have hesitated long about undertaking this discussion of Liberian politics. We are almost certain to be misunderstood, no matter what we say or how we say it. In Liberia they will feel that we lack sympathy, that we drag forth their weaknesses and expose them to public scorn; in this country they will fail to see that the weak points of Liberian politics are common to all republics, that they are as flagrant among ourselves as in Liberia; in foreign lands--should our book be read in such--what we say will be taken as justification for continued aggression and interference. We wish that Liberia were a land of general education; that the whole population had a clear understanding of the duties of citizenship; that knowledge of public questions were general. Such conditions are ideal in a republic. We do not find them in Liberia; we do not find them here. Liberian politics is patterned on our own; its weaknesses are our weaknesses. It is easy for us to see its faults because we are an outside party; because we are rich and they are poor; because we are white and they are black. In Liberia there is a general desire to feed at the public trough; it makes no difference what a man is or what he has accomplished, every one is ready to go into politics; neither trade, agriculture, nor professional life restrains a man who has political opportunities presented to him; everybody of ability wants office. This is unfortunate; it is neither strange, unique, nor blameworthy. Every official, however, has a list of dependents; once in office, he must provide for others; the number of brothers, sons, nephews, and cousins of officials who find some clerkship or small appointment is relatively large. As almost every office in the Republic, save that of representatives and senators, is appointed by the President, it is very easy for one who holds office to practice nepotism. It is and will be a long time before anything like actual civil service can find a place in Liberia. Such a condition of course leads to little activity in the doing of work for the Government; the less a man can do to earn his salary, the better, so long as he is certain of his job. We have already called attention to the fact, quoting from Ellis, that there is relatively little of what we know as party politics in Liberia. Practically there are no well marked political platforms based on principles. If, perchance, hostility to the powers that be threatens to become dangerous, it may be checked by skilful appointment from the opposition to office. Thus, at the last election, which was the most bitterly fought for many years, it was claimed that the defeated candidate, J. J. Dossen, would never be heard of in politics again; such, however, was not the case; he must be provided for, in order that his later course might not threaten the existing status; being without a job, he received appointment to the presidency of Liberia College--a mere temporary arrangement of course; he is now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

There are, however, personal likes and dislikes which will vent themselves in outbursts of party spirit. The last election was really furious. It voiced the local jealousies of the whole Republic. Just as in the state of Illinois it is Chicago against the counties, and as in New York State it is the City of New York against the upstate districts: so, in Liberia, it is Monrovia against the counties. The election was really close after an exciting campaign. Charges of fraud were bitterly advanced. According to the _African League_, there were wild doings in Bassa County where it is printed. We refrain from really quoting the _interesting_ and _exciting_ passages from its article, but venture to give here its opening paragraphs:

“As the day of election approached, great preparations were made by the Government and the Government officials to defeat the National True Whig Party at any cost, and in any manner. They sent money in every direction to call unqualified nameless bushmen to come, and put into the hands of the Sheriff a paper which is worth only so much gin and rum to the bushmen. These bush people had never seen, nor heard of, the registrar’s office. Neither do they own any land in contemplation of law, but Howard people, simply because they have had the Government’s approval in this corruption, had planned to force the corruption into the polls.

The people who stand for law and order sent white plates to all the native chiefs, after the customs of the heathen, telling them to have nothing to do with the matter in which they are not concerned and know nothing about.

The Government people threatened that they would vote these bush people or die. The people knew what that meant, and they began to prepare for the worst, for they were determined that the law should not be trampled under foot in that way to their prejudice, and that, too, by those who are the administrators of the law. On Monday, the first of May, a host of these uncivilized bush people, headed by Major Horace, flocked into the upper ward of Buchanan, well armed with the best guns of the Government, and that night shooting in the streets was a common thing. Near Lower Buchanan, there were different bands of these wild, bush people in camp carrying on their savage plays. In Lower Buchanan at the Vai town, the hideous noise was kept up all night, apparently as a menace to the citizens for the next day.” On the following day the election took place throughout the Republic, resulting in the continuance in power of the interests which for so long had controlled the destinies of the nation; nine contested cases were lodged against the House of Representatives and one against the Senate; threats ran high, feeling was intense. It is certainly an interesting moment when more than half the membership of a house of Congress is in dispute. Yet this excitement was allayed, and the contests were all withdrawn; it was realized that Congress had important business before it in connection with the American Loan, and that the future of the Republic would be seriously jeopardized if the time of Congress were taken up with hearing contest cases instead of dealing with these outside matters.

There is no question that in Liberia illegal voting is common. The election to which we have referred above was that of 1911; in 1901 Bishop Ferguson issued a charge to his clergy and lay members upon the subject of election evils in which the following words occur: “The corruptions and wickedness that have attended the last three or four campaigns are startling to all right-minded people, and, if continued, no prophet is needed to foretell the disastrous consequences that will inevitably follow. Election frauds, open-handed bribery, and the utter disregard of all moral restraints seem to be the order of the day. Those who at other times are recognized as Christian gentlemen, do not scruple on these occasions to perpetrate offenses that are condemned both by God’s law and that of the state. To procure the election of a party man, they lose sight of, or completely disregard, their standing in the Church, in society, or the social circle; and will stoop to do the meanest act. What is worse than all, is the fact that the evils have become so rife that it appears there are not to be found innocent citizens enough to punish the guilty under the laws of the land. And now, to my mind, the worst feature of the thing is the fact that the aborigines--our brothers just emerging from the darkness of heathenism--are either coming voluntarily, sought out and persuaded, or actually forced into this whirl-pool of corruption and wickedness. It is enough to chill one’s blood to think of the impression made on their minds, on their induction into civilized usages at such time:--jostled through a crowd of men,--ruffians now, though at other times Christian gentlemen--armed with deadly weapons of every description, they are made to swear that they are constitutionally qualified for the highest privilege of citizenship under a republican form of government.”

Again in an Independence Day address given by Dr. Dingwall at Buchanan in 1910 were these words: “Ignorant and purchasable voters are ruinous to all other republics. Why not to ours likewise? At the polls the vote of a fool is counted one, and that one takes the whole of a philosopher’s to cancel it. Now in Liberia these are chiefly manufactured from the wild heathen, more than ninety-nine in a night. The privilege to take a few acres of land and register hundreds of nameless natives, or on election day to vote each hour the identical bushman, by simply christening him afresh for each occasion, is a dangerous weapon in the hands of politicians. This practice would have destroyed democracy, were these leaders even honest in purpose and patriotic in spirit.”

The seriousness of the situation is that any effort to keep the native vote from being fraudulently cast, is likely to interfere with the legitimate voting of qualified chiefs; the desirability of having those natives who are really entitled to the vote exercise their right of franchise is most important; but to give unqualified native voters the chance to cast fraudulent ballots is bad indeed. Of course this whole question of illegal voting should hardly shock us; in my own morning paper, the very day when I am writing this, these words appear in prominent head-lines: “Fraud in ballots a Chicago habit Butts Board told.” It is impossible for the pot to call the kettle black. The outside world, however, unaccustomed to the little peculiarities of “manhood suffrage,” will no doubt claim to be sadly shocked; it might even be that some clean-skirted nation like France or England might hysterically demand reform.

We have elsewhere claimed that the Liberians, too, know graft. Official salaries are very small; why then does political office possess such great attraction? Of course position and power count for something; but there are other solid advantages connected with office in Liberia as well as in other lands. When graft exists in France, Germany, even in respectable and pious England, it is not strange that it exists in the African Republic. More than that, graft is by no means confined to civilization; the native in the bush understands it both in theory and practice. It would be strange indeed if the descendants of barbaric grafters, who had been trained in civilized graft through a long American experience, should be free from graft when conducting their own affairs in a new land as rich by nature as is Liberia. The number of schemes which are proposed to the Liberian Legislature is very large; many of them are magnificent in their proportions, enterprises, and prospects; what could be more dazzling than the project submitted a few years ago by the Ellsworth Company of New York? I do not mean to say that that individual company used improper means to influence legislative action; but a company with as ambitious plans as they offered, if adequately capitalized, could easily have made the whole Legislature rich rather than lose their opportunity. In the same way Sir William Lever, in his effort to secure monopoly or large advantage in the palm-oil product of the Republic would, from a business point of view, be amply justified in making it well worth while for the patriots to encourage his enterprise. Of course, many of these schemes fail totally; many of them never get beyond a paper proposition; in the past, however, the Liberian Legislature has been much too free in giving concessions with monopolies. While the terms given to the English Rubber Company seemed to leave opportunity for competitive development of the trade by others, it practically put all competitors in the power of the company. Liberia is beginning to realize that in careless granting of monopolies and special privileges she has hampered her own freedom and interfered with legitimate development; not long ago the Government granted a concession to Edgar Allen Forbes and others; it seems to have been a legitimate and carefully-thought-out enterprise which he submitted; its development would no doubt be advantageous to the public; but it is found that previous concessions were infringed by some of its terms, and difficulties have arisen. On the whole, it would be much better for Liberia if the propositions submitted to it were less pretentious and far-reaching; it is better that she should have fifty different companies operating within her borders, each within a definite field and succeeding within modest limits, than that everything should be held in the hands of one or two great corporations which, when a moment of difficulty comes, may be able to bring influences to bear which will threaten or even destroy the existence of the nation.

Liberian officials quite well know the thing which we call junkets. One might almost think himself at home at times. When some crisis arises, and the “Lark” must be sent to a seat of danger, high officials, whose relations to the Government are not such that their presence is necessary at the seat of disturbance, take advantage of the opportunity for a fine outing. The nation may be in financial difficulty, but good food, good smoking, and good drinks seem easily provided; such an outing not infrequently gives the official opportunity to transact private business, for he may have interests near the seat of the disturbance. Junkets are presumably inherent in governmental activities of every kind; they are not confined to democracies, though they are common in them. Anywhere of course they are undesirable and should be curbed; nations, especially republics, should not be called upon to supply free outings, free business opportunities, free luxuries to individuals at public cost.

One of the reforms demanded by the British memorandum was the improvement of the judiciary. Here there was indeed real reason for complaint. Liberia has few well trained lawyers; it was not uncommon for a man to be appointed judge who had no legal training; there were not infrequent cases of personal and professional misconduct on the part of judges. President Barclay, in his message of 1908, a notable document be it said in passing, says the following: “International attacks upon this (our judicial system) commenced some years ago, and the movement was initiated by citizens of the German Empire living in Liberia. But the crisis has been precipitated by our people. When the editor of the _African League_, himself an ex-judge, an attorney at law, a citizen, publishes a special edition of his paper, headed “Startling Revelations,” in which the judicial system of the country is attacked both in its personnel as well as on its administrative side, when he describes himself as a scapegoat and martyr, and when months pass and no reply to his attack is made by the persons affected, what conclusion, do you think, can other communities of the world, having business interests in Liberia, draw?” In his address, _The Impartial Administration of Justice, the Corner-Stone of a Nation_, Justice T. McCants Stewart says: “It can not be denied, however, that our judiciary to-day is the object of serious charges both by foreigners and our own citizens, and they are charges which demand serious consideration. They can not be brushed aside. The British Government is not alone in making these charges. Our own people have made them, and our Chief Executive has declared to the Legislature that evils exist in our judicial system which must be speedily remedied if we desire to strengthen ourselves as a nation. Gentlemen of the Bar: Can we be quiet while our judges are charged both at home and abroad with: (1) ignorance; (2) excessive use of intoxicants; (3) the exhibition of prejudice or passion in the trial of cases; (4) shocking immorality; (5) accepting retainers from private parties; (6) sharing moneys as a reward for the arrest of criminals; (7) accepting bribes?” This is specific enough and bad enough. To the credit of the nation be it said that reforms have seriously been undertaken, and the present condition of the judiciary is greatly improved. It is rather interesting that we ourselves at this moment are agitating against a corrupt judiciary; it is scarcely likely that we are in a condition for stone-throwing.