The Development of British Overseas Humanitarianism and the Congo Reform Campaign

Growing out of a tradition of charity to one's neighbors or dependents as a religious and social duty, the movement to abolish the slave trade inaugurated British humanitarianism directed to the suffering of distant strangers. Abolitionists saw the world as their responsibility, a perspective carried forward by other groups through the present. The Congo reform movement of 1890-1913 built on Victorian experience and pioneered a more popular and multifaceted overseas humanitarianism. Although historians have not studied Congo reform in the context of humanitarianism, its origins and success lie not only in the work of particular individuals, but in the structure of British voluntary humanitarian associations and in British society. This legacy helps us understand its triumph, with all its flaws, in the context of volunteers' motives, the movement's methods, and its outcomes.

The Congo Reform Movement

King Leopold II of Belgium, the proprietor or king-sovereign of the Congo Free State from 1885-1908, made a fortune from Congo ivory and rubber. All lands not actively cultivated or inhabited by Africans became Leopold's property, in some places granted to a concession company in exchange for fees and an ownership stake. In remote districts, away from prying eyes, a few Europeans backed by an impressed African army terrorized villages to deliver rubber, provisions, and men. The massive disruption of local society, tendency of the system to encourage violent behavior in the pursuit of profits, and the consequent death toll made the Free State a dramatic and tragic example of colonial exploitation and oppression.¹

The movement for reform started when the London-based Aborigines' Protection Society took up the cause. Despite the Society's efforts, the British government would not act. The Foreign Secretary, Lord Lansdowne, was reluctant to interfere in another country's business and felt that no colonial power's hands - even Britain's - were altogether clean. The movement for reform accelerated when E. D. Morel, a shipping clerk, compared the falsified official reports of the Free State with shipping records and rubber sales. Far from being a loss-making enterprise, as Leopold complained, the Free State was reaping a hidden fortune for its proprietor on the scale of £500,000 in a single two-year period (1899-1900), or over £40,000,000 ($70,000,000) in today's money.² Finding the Free State's imports composed primarily of weapons, Morel concluded that these fortunes were reaped from the coerced labor of unwilling subjects. Morel published his findings, arousing public concern. Information from the Aborigines' Protection Society and Morel, supported by several Chambers of Commerce, led Parliament to pass a unanimous resolution protesting mistreatment of the Congolese as well as Leopold's trading monopoly. As a result, the reluctant Foreign Secretary acceded to the requests of his Congo consul, Roger Casement, for permission to report on the conditions in the interior. Casement's report provoked a public outcry. To sustain the outcry and exert pressure, Morel, Fox Bourne, and businessman John Holt founded the Congo Reform Association in 1903. The campaign spread to include an American Congo Reform Association, reformers in Belgium, and auxiliaries in other countries. By 1906, the new Liberal Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward Grey, had committed to reform. Yielding to pressure, King Leopold sold the Congo Free State to Belgium in 1908. Grey and the association labored for four more years to convince Belgium to fix Leopold's system. Finally, in 1913, Grey and the association concluded that Belgium had reformed the administration sufficiently to justify ending the campaign.

British Humanitarianism

The roots of the reform campaign lay in the humanitarian tradition, which had developed over time, as loosely conveyed by the terms charity, philanthropy, and humanitarianism. Some historians use these words interchangeably and others maintain rigid distinctions, but David Owen usefully implies an expanding meaning, reflected in the etymology.³ Charity, the oldest term, reflects Christian principles, while philanthropy (first used in 1623) is not necessarily religious. Humanitarianism first appeared in the 1800s to describe those concerned with the welfare of mankind. In this paper, the shift from charity to philanthropy to humanitarianism means broadening purview...