Stories from Deli

Het Vaderland 02-10-1876

The Hague, 30 September.

Twice, Mr. Wintgens spoke during the session of the Lower House on Tuesday, the 11th. First, he addressed the issue of primary education. What he said about that education left a very unpleasant impression on us. The same man who, before his re-election as a representative, indicated that he was not averse to joining the “People’s Education” association, now declared in the Lower House that a revision of the law on primary education in and of itself (!) is not particularly desirable. Yes, he went further and claimed in good conscience to believe that, generally speaking, 99 out of 100 of the nation are not particularly eager for a change in that law, and that the movement in the country is little more than an artificially stirred-up agitation. 99 out of 100 of the nation are not eager for a revision of the school law! Shouldn’t one think of a printing error here? Mr. Wintgens is, of course, free to believe in good conscience whatever he wishes, but there are probably not 99 people in the entire nation who share this belief with him.

It is a fact that not everyone has the same grievances against the school law, that a large part only demands revision of a pedagogical nature, while another part seeks to improve the condition of private schools through changes in the law, but how one can honestly believe that only very few want a revision of the school law on the grounds that they find the law as such insufficient or bad is an inexplicable mystery to us.

There is another reason why the school law must be revised, claims Mr. Wintgens, and that reason is “that the education issue has become a poison for our political life and a pivot around which our entire politics revolves.” But does our representative from The Hague really believe that the education issue could have become the pivot around which our entire politics revolves if indeed 99 out of 100 of the nation did not consider the revision of the primary education law in and of itself so particularly necessary?

Therefore, we cannot agree with what Mr. Wintgens said on Tuesday about school law revision, but we gladly express a word of sympathy for his condemnation of the way in which our government seems to want to bring civilization to Sumatra. “The question,” he said, “arises: what is our mission in the north of Sumatra? How should we interpret our task there? How should we, as a civilized nation, act among those less developed populations to establish our authority as a colonial power?”

In this regard, I was painfully struck by a report from the Governor-General from the military commander in Aceh, dated July 16, recently published in the “State Gazette” of September 10 and 11. Regarding the manner in which the war there, if it can be called that, is being conducted, I read the following in that report: “A patrol was made from Biloel-South into enemy territory; it succeeded in burning down approximately 60 houses and driving the enemy away with the loss of 7 dead on their side.” On the other hand, the enemy ambushed a transport of ours between Kota-Alam and Pango on the 14th, resulting in the loss of one man.” Based on that report, I feel entitled to say: What we currently hear about what happened in the Balkans, is that something different? Houses burned down and 7 dead left behind! It seems to me that such activities deserve a name other than war.

But I read something else in that report. It continues: “The leasing of opium and gambling has been very successful despite the peculiar difficulties associated with an initial lease and the short lease term of only 5 months. It is expected that with the next lease, the revenue will be significantly higher.” This follows the aforementioned sketch of the military operations. Both seem characteristic to me of the situation, of what is happening there: first, arson and murder! There is no organized war; they pounce on each other like tigers from their hiding places; an unworthy occupation for a soldier. And then we also hear that now, for the first time, the opium and gambling have been leased out and with the best result. The lease amount is not mentioned, but this is the report of the military and civil commander in Aceh to the head of the Government of the Dutch East Indies.

So, this is the way in which Dutch authority, the authority of honest, loyal Netherlands, is being established among those native populations. I ask: is this the way we should wish that European civilization is introduced by us over there? And this does not only apply to the north of Sumatra. Recently, we received an important address from Mr. Cremer, administrator of the Deli Company, which contains the following: “Gambling, with all its pernicious consequences, is increasing greatly here. Previously, under the Sultan’s rule, it was not allowed on the estates, and there was only one place, at the main station Laboean, where gambling was permitted. Only at Chinese New Year and during some other festivals was it allowed elsewhere. Since the takeover of the revenue by the Government, the gambling lease has been exploited to bring in as much as possible. The country is flooded with gambling houses. On the main road between Laboean and Medan, a distance of less than 12 miles, there are, for example, seven. At the first lease, this lease alone yielded 119,400 guilders, which is more than half of the opium lease, which yielded 218,400 guilders. In the Straits Settlements, there is no gambling lease; gambling is prohibited there. Here, on the other hand, it is encouraged, while restriction is desirable.”

All this takes place under Dutch authority, while England prohibits gambling in the Straits Settlements, just as the Sultan’s government in Deli did before. Here, on the other hand, it is encouraged. Now I present to the Government, particularly the Minister of Colonies, and also to the Assembly, the question: should this continue in that way? Should we continue to develop the population along this path through opium and gambling?

Arson, murder, the encouragement of opium dens and gambling: this, according to Mr. Wintgens, is the way in which the establishment of Dutch authority among those native populations is taking place! The accusation sounds harsh, but—to our shame—it must be acknowledged that Mr. Wintgens’s grievances are not unfounded. We, too, have been highly annoyed by the leasing of opium and gambling. True, the Government has tried to justify its actions by arguing that even more gambling and more opium would be used in Aceh if the monopoly on these matters were not leased out, just as even more gin would be consumed in the Netherlands if there were no excise on distilled spirits. But while that argument may prove that the Government could allow immorality to flourish even more by another means, it does not negate the fact that the Dutch Government, instead of strictly prohibiting opium dens and gambling in the new military settlement as the uncivilized Sultans did, sells the right to a few profiteers to exploit the immoral passions of the natives under the very eyes of our civil and military commander.

Where the Dutch people see this happening, they have every right to ask: “Is this the way we should wish that European civilization is introduced by us over there?” But that question should not, in our conviction, be the end of it. The matter is of the greatest importance, also for the prestige of our authority. Now that the Government is unwilling to abandon the wrong path, it is up to the representatives of the people to exert all their influence to ensure that the delightful (!) prospect of the authorities for an even higher lease sum in the next year is thwarted in time.