# Max Havelaar (Nahuijs)/Preface

Layout 2
Max Havelaar was published a few years ago, and caused such a sensation in Holland as was never before experienced in that country. The author wrote it under the pseudonym of Multatuli, but his real name, Eduard Douwes Dekker, formerly Assistant Resident of the Dutch Government in Java, at once became known. Full of fire, and overflowing with enthusiasm, the author presented it to his countrymen in the form of a novel,—a book wherein he made them acquainted with the incredible extortions and tyranny of which the natives of the Dutch Indies, “that magnificent empire of Insulind, which winds about the equator like a garland of emeralds,” are the victims, and how he tried in vain, while still in the service of the Government, to put an end to the cruel oppressions that happen every day in those countries. Though some considered his book to be merely an interesting and cap​tivating novel, the author maintained that it contained nothing but facts. He boldly asked the Dutch Govern­ment to prove the substance of his book to be false, but its truth has never been disputed. At the International Congress for the promotion of Social Sciences at Am­sterdam, in 1863, he challenged his countrymen to refute him, but there was no champion to accept the challenge. In short, Mr. Douwes Dekker, who had been a functionary in the service of the Dutch Government for the space of seventeen years, rather understated than overstated the truth. Not a single fact was ever contested in Holland, and he is still ready to prove his statements. In the Dutch Parliament nobody answered a single word, but Mr. Van Twist, ex-Governor-General of the Dutch Indies, who, on being appealed to by the Baron Van Hoevell, said that he could perhaps refute Max Havelaar, but that it was not his interest to do so.
The book proves that what was formerly written in Uncle Tom’s Cabin of the cruelties perpetrated upon the ​slaves in America, is nothing in comparison to what hap­pens every day in the Dutch Indies.
“Max Havelaar” is the name under which the author chooses to describe his experiences in the East; in the first chapters of the book he has just returned from India, and he meets an old school-companion, at that time a coffee-broker, a Mr. Drystubble. This Mr. Drystubble is very rich, and the author being just then very poor, the latter asks his old school-fellow to be security for the publishing of his book. At first Mr. Drystubble will not hear of this, but afterwards, when he perceives that it will be of some advantage to himself, he consents. Drystubble is a very characteristic person, knowing nothing beyond his trade, a great egotist, and is represented by the author with true wit and humour, in order to show the extreme contrast between himself and....some of his countrymen, whom he may perhaps have met with since his return from Java. At that time the author wears a plaid or shawl, and Mr. Drystubble therefore speaks always of him as Mr. Shawlman. A few months after the publication of Max Havelaar, one of the most eminent members of the Dutch Parliament avowed that this book had struck the whole country with horror. In vain the Dutch tried to ​make a party question of it. The author openly de­clared that he belonged neither to the Liberal nor to the Conservative party; but that he placed himself under the banner of Right, Equity, and Humanity. As soon, however, as he professed to be a mere friend of man­kind, without bias to any political party, the official world avoided even to pronounce his name, and affected to have forgotten the man whose conduct had before been considered as a reproof, and whose influence men­aced danger to people in place. Instead of accepting the challenge, it seemed more worthy to fight the battle out with the vile weapons of abuse and slander. Of course the reader will not regard Mr. Drystubble’s non­sensical and hypocritical observations as the sentiments of our author. It is precisely Multatuli’s intention to make Drystubble odious, and his philosophy absurd, though sometimes he speaks truth and common-sense—for he is a type of a part of the Dutch nation.
So much for the tendency of the book. Need I say that it will do honour to the literature of any language, and that it may be read as well for profit as for amusement? But Max Havelaar is immortal, not because of literary art or talent, but because of the cause he advocates. I think that every one who admires Harriet Beecher Stowe’s ​immortal pleading, ought likewise to read Multatuli’s accusation. I compare Max Havelaar to Uncle Tom’s Cabin, but I do not compare Multatuli, the champion and the martyr of humanity and justice, to Mrs. Stowe, for I am not aware that that lady, with all her merits, has sacrificed future fortune, and all that makes life agree­able, for a principle—for right and equity—as has been done by Eduard Douwes Dekker. Max Havelaar bears evidence of having been written by a genius of that order which only appears at long intervals in the world’s history. His mind embraces in its intellectual compass all man­kind, regardless of race or caste. By the diffusion of this book a bond will be formed embracing all lovers of genius and justice throughout the world.
It was the intention of the author to have had his work translated into all the European languages. Unfortunately he unwittingly disposed of the property of his own book, and if it had not thus been “legally” withheld from the people of Holland, it is probable that I should not have been its translator; but I have been constrained to make known as widely as possible the sad truth regarding the mal-administration of laws in themselves good, by the Dutch Government in her Indian dependencies. To the British nation the facts will be new, as the books pub​lished in England on Dutch India are few in number, superficial in character, and give no idea of the condition of the native population. I cannot judge of English politics or about British India, but however perfect British rule may be, it cannot be so perfect that it has nothing more to learn.
Alphonse Johan Bernard Horstmar Nahuÿs.
The Hague, January 17, 1868.