December 3 Sunday – Gribben cites the New York World’s article “Twain Calls Leopold Slayer of 15,000,000,” and speculates: “Twain probably drew on Suetonius when he mentioned Nero as a killer” [677]. Note: the interview is in Scharnhorst, p.528-31, and also online at the Univ. Washington site:

Twain Calls Leopold Slayer of 15,000,000 Besides Leopold, Nero, Caligula, Attila, Torquemada, Genghis Khan, and such killers of men are mere amateurs.

My interest in the Congo and the Belgian King’s connection with that State is not personal further than that I am a citizen of the United States and am pledged, like every other citizen of the United States to superintend that King as foreman and superintendent of that property.

Thirteen Christian nations stand pledged like our own. The thirteen are responsible for that King’s good conduct, for his humane conduct; we are all officially committed to see that King Leopold does his righteous duty in the Congo State, or, if he falls short of his duty, to call him to strict account.

By the arrangement in 1884 at Berlin the Christian powers gave the well-being of the Congo State into the hands of the International Association and charged that association with a couple of very important responsibilities. The association was required to protect the natives from harm and to advance their well-being in various ways; also it was charged with the duty of seeing that the several Christian states have freedom of trade in the Congo State.

The King of the Belgians has taken over the whole property; he is acting as an absolute sovereign in that State. He has over-ridden all the restrictions put upon at Berlin in 1884, and by the conference of Brussels in 1890. He has thus, in taking over this vast State, which is twice as large as the German Empire, very rich and very populous before he began his devastation, robberies and massacres of the natives, taken upon himself all the responsibilities which were placed upon the International Association. By the terms of the two conventions it is not only the privilege of those Christian powers to call him to account, but it is their duty to do this—a duty which they solemnly assumed, and which they are neglecting.

The responsibility of the United States may be said to take first place, because we were the first of the nations to recognize the Congo flag, which was done by a Presidential order in 1884. We occupied the office of midwife to the Congo State and brought it into the world. But we are not any more responsible than are the other powers. There should be a concert of action between them. That concert will be brought about in due time; the movement is on foot on the other side of the water and is making progress, particularly in England, where the Government is becoming more and more interested in the matter, and where the people are strongly stirred and are giving voice to their outraged feelings.

The outlook is that England will presently invite the other powers to join her in demanding a searching inquiry into Leopold’s performance, this inquiry to be conducted by a commission, not appointed by him as was the late one, but by themselves. We shall need to take a hand in this righteous proceeding, and it is not likely that we shall be backward about it.

The packed commission appointed by Leopold finished its work and prepared its report many months ago. It was made as mild as possible, but it was nevertheless not the sort of report which the King wanted to spread before the civilized nations. He kept it back several months and issued it lately, and with very proper reluctance. There is a matter connected with that report history which had a good deal of significance at the time. I speak of the suicide of the chief Congo official, a governor-general or something like that. That man had been representing the King a good many years; his treatment of the natives had been merciless; he harried them with the torch and the sword; he robbed and burned right and left; he was bitterly hated, not by the natives only but by the whites. He read the report of the commission in its original shape there on the Congo before Leopold had had an opportunity to blue-pencil it.

Late that night two white men, one of whom was an Englishman of high character and position, occupied a room next to the Governor-General’s. They heard a peculiar noise, and one of them said to the other: “Something is happening in that room.”

They went in there and found the Governor-General gasping out his life with his throat cut. The noise they had heard was the streaming of his blood upon the floor. His last act had been the writing of a note of a rather impressive character. I cannot quote its language, but in substance it was to this effect:

“I cannot stand up against that report, yet I can only say in all sincerity that everything I have done was by command of the King himself.”

That note was brought away, and is now in the possession of that Englishman. I have these facts from an American missionary who was on the spot at the time, and who vouches for their authenticity.

The King has not mended the condition of things in the Congo since he blue-pencilled that report and issued it. The atrocities go on just as before, and the world must expect them to continue until the Christian powers shall exercise the right which they have reserved to themselves at Berlin and Brussels to put an end to them.

The pamphlet which I lately issued contains a small part of the twenty-year accumulation of evidence against King Leopold, and this evidence is of an authority which cannot be disputed. It comes from English officials, Belgian officials, and from American missionaries of unimpeachable character. I intend that the pamphlet shall go into the hands of every clergyman in America, and this purpose will be carried out. We have eighty millions of people who will speak, and speak audibly, when they find out the infamies that are being perpetrated in the Congo, and that our whole nation has a personal interest in the matter and is under written engagement to look after it. 

Note: Hawkins again points out that Sam once more mistakenly assumed the U.S. had ratified the Berlin Act of 1885, which he put forth as America’s supposed legal obligation. Sam was optimistic about action against King Leopold, and believed the U.S. would “take a hand” [162- 3].

Fanny Hallock Carpenter (Mrs. Philip Carpenter) wrote from NYC to Sam, enclosing her 1901 “translation” of  “Extracts from Eve’s Diary”—some 24 half-pages typed.

Elizabeth Jenks Comfort wrote from Monte Carlo to ask Sam for his autograph for her “very clever little Anglo-American grandson” [MTP].

F.P. Jones wrote birthday congratulations to Sam [MTP].

W. Gillison and Theo Williams (two undergraduates at Cambridge, England) wrote to Sam with “how delighted” they were by “Eve’s Diary” [MTP].

Merrill Tiliston wrote from the Hotel Newberry, Chicago to ask Sam’s “sanction in the use of the words / ‘By permission Mark Twain’ painted upon the coffin box of that Buffalo Express graveyard skit…” [MTP]. Note: on the bottom: “Mr. Clemens would rather he would not use it —makes him a party & he would rather word it.” See ca. Dec. 6 for Sam’s reply, which allows three days postal time Chicago to N.Y.