River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1878-10-24
SANKEY'S Wars.

Of Stanley's wars much has been writ
ten Various Englishmen, from Lord
Derby down, have expressed an opinion
upon these conflicts, and the discussion
bids fair to become permanent chapter
in African literature. The American OBJ
server will notice that at the time Stanley
was adding fame to the names of the
British Princess Beatrice and the future
British Queen Alexandra by giving these
names to two important discoveries il
Africa, Lord Derby was issuing orders 70
the British consulS to prevent his carry
Columbus returning home in chains a
prisoner to the king to whose empire he
had added continental dominion. 1t was
rumored that Stanley was to be arrested
when he came to the coast, if he ever did
come; and the New York Herald, as his
employer and champion, went SO far as to
advance his American citizenship as a
reason why he should not be arrested
without at least a protest from the Amer
lean government. But as it happened
that Stanley did return to British soil an
honored guest on a British man -ofwar
and not prisoner, and the first to well
come him was the Prince of Wales, we
may be justified in assuming that Lord
Derby's action was an impulse based up
on incorrect information, and never a
serious purpose of the government. Of
course if Stanley could have crossed the
African continent without harming any
one, his taking of life would have been
massacre. The history of African ex-
ploration in our own Indian territories, is
he ha Of
In our country white men were slain to
crafty a savage's craving for blood. In
many parts of Africa men are slain for
food. Stanley good part of his time
was moving among people who would
have killed him and his whole command,
as our Indians kill the buffalo, zamely TO
eat them. II don't choose" said Living
ston, "to be made meat for blackmen.n
This was one of the reasons why that
gentle soul refused to go into the Congo
country and it was in the Congo country
that Stanley fought most of his battles.
We think the law of self, defense can be
put on no higher ground than the dislike
10 be killed and eaten by your enemy. In
other regions Stanley fought to save him
self from being killed and his army
robbed. His expedition was tempting
one to the black men. He carried his
army chest with him in the shape of beads
and cloths and wire and cowries and arti-
cles of merchandise, which were as much
the currer CIV of his command as the
greenbacks with which we paid our
armies during the war. We take it no
prudent commander would allow his
army chest to be carried away without
defendi lg il, especially if he depended
upon it,as Stanley did, for all his supplies.
1t was his army chest, and contained his
provisions. He could only live by buy
ing from the people, and he could only
buy with his supplies. In some cases
the people were in fear of the slave
traders. Stanley may have been attacked
under the impression that he was coming
10 carry off men and women and children
into slavery. If this led to the loss OF
life, then we must all lament it, but the
blame is not upon Stanley, but upon the
odious system which European civiliza-
ton planted in Africa, which still -four
ishes, but which no one one has done SO
much to destroy as our explorer. In all
these savage countries the traveller is sub.
iect to one of this sudden, lawless gusts
of passion which fell upon Captain Cook
in the Pacific and deprived science and
humanity of that intrepid and glorious
life The difference between Stanley and
Captain Cook is that Stanley killed his
assailants. If Captain Cook had been SO
fortunate, we question if Lord Chatham
would have been SO eager TO deprive
him of his flag as Lord Derby was to with
draw from Stanley the flag which was
the emblem of the English fraction of his
expedition.-JohnR Russell Young, IN Har
ner's M0Qdgine for October