In the CoDgo debate in the Belgian Chamber on Friday
week M. Vandervelde, the Socialist leader, delivered a speech which must rank with that of M. Beernaert as the most weighty in the discussion. He treated the question on its general rather than on its legal aspect. While admitting that the Congo enterprise had its merits as an antidote to Belgian parochialism, he criticised it on the ground that the position of King Leopold involved difficulties with the Consti- tutional Government of Belgium, and that the exploitation of the country meant the oppression of the natives. He had the courage to express his sympathy with the "English cam- paign " and to defend Mr. Morel's work. M. Huystnans had spoken contemptuously of Mr. Morel and his acolytes. Did he mean the English Bishops, Lord Lansdowne, and Sir Edward Grey? Like M. Hymans, he demanded full infor- mation before considering the question of annexation; but he would not, with that speaker, pretend that he found pleasure in the contemplation of reforms which meant nothing. Above all, he could not render homage to the founder of the Congo. "He hoped that the day would come when Belgium . . . . . . would blot out the memory of the shame and -misery, and, he would add, the crimes, connected with the Congo of Leopold II." M. Vandervelde spoke for himself and not for his party, but it is probable that the Socialist section will support his policy.
Previous page
